Talk:Contest3

Contest3_Pre-Game_Analysis

Breaking News

I agreed to participate in this contest provided the points scoring is amended to include Breaking News items and edits to associated articles. Several of us sysops modify the Breaking News on a daily basis and it's only fair to award points based on our contributions.

I propose this addition to the point system:

• Breaking News Item: 3 points

• Definition: A Breaking news item is placed on the Main page with wiki links to Conservapedia articles and a link to the external reference article.
• Exception: A non-administrator who submits an article to an administrator and the article is placed on the Main page will receive 1 point and the administrator will receive 2 points for adding the article and links. It is at the administrator's discretion whether to place the article on the Main page.
• Bonus: Adding a relevant photo will receive 2 points. Editing an associated article (wikilinked) will score points under the regular points system.

Example:
Lieberman Blasts Democrats Over Partisan-Driven Foreign Policy Fox News [1]
"Sen. Joe Lieberman painted a dim picture of his party, saying Democrats have given up their moral authority on foreign policy because they are more concerned with opposing Republicans than doing what is right."

This article was placed on the Breaking News section of the Main Page.
The wiki links to Conservapedia articles are: Lieberman, Democrats, etc.
The external link is http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,309620,00.html. --Crocoite 11:57, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Such a plan would require the unprotection of Template:Mainpageright for the duration of the contest, otherwise the contest would be biased towards the sysops. --_transResident Transfan^form!

The template will not be unprotected since that would leave it open to vandalism. There are sysops available on both teams so it would still be fair. --Crocoite 13:19, 9 November 2007 (EST)

I'm not a sysop and I agree. The small inconvenience during the contest is not worth the price of inviting in vandalism. Learn together 17:04, 9 November 2007 (EST)

As in the past, I think you may have that tool, or why not, may be, become a sysop regarding your good work in CP. Let see what TK thinks about it.--User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 17:12, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Thank you my friend, but I think I should clarify myself since I did a poor job above. I'm not a sysop, but I agree that the policy of keeping templates protected is appropriate, even if it means a slight inconvenience to people such as myself. That inconvenience is a small price to pay if it keeps away a major source of vandalism. Learn together 18:01, 9 November 2007 (EST)

• No unprotections, sorry. I agree with the point structure, as I think that is what it was last contest. --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 14:18, 9 November 2007 (EST)

This contest is so unfair: if I simply start keeping score for the edits I normally make, my team will certainly win! :P --Ed Poor ^Talk 16:59, 9 November 2007 (EST)

• Ed Poor, I invite you to make substantial and accurate edits here at the fasted growing educational site on the Internet, and not just on silly talk pages! If you make an ancillary page from your user page, with the link there to it, and merely list your edits, and what you did, I would be honored to attach and add the points for you, a living wiki legend! --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 18:12, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Super-Secret Team Pages!!

Could we please have their creation and links? Thanks! --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 17:09, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Pick me pick me :-)

I just joined yesterday but I'm eager to help :-) -MexMax 17:21, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, yes....get Andy to pick some, so I can! He is holding up everything! :P --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 18:22, 9 November 2007 (EST)

Do you guys still need a member #10?!? Maybe I'll join just so you guys can begin; I'll hardly be able to do much --Steve-o 20:57, 12 November 2007 (EST)

Judges

Do we have names? --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 14:50, 11 November 2007 (EST)

If you need judges (I don't think we had any for the last contest) I can volunteer. I don't have much time right now to actually join the contest, but I should certainly have enough time to judge if you want me to. HelpJazz 20:01, 11 November 2007 (EST)

It's done on an honor system; after all, there are no cash prizes. While it would be nice to have judges, I think it was decided that it was too difficult. There were judges in the first contest, but it took them a long time to finish and that was after working very hard! It took me hours all by myself just to add up my totals from the last contest, so multiply that by 14 or so!

Realistically, since we're all on the same team (the CP team), we should be able to reach common understandings on any differences without too much trouble. Learn together 20:45, 12 November 2007 (EST)

Plagiarism

I do not think plagiarism should count towards points. Please have a look at the number of revisions I made to plagiarised articles by one of the contestants. --JBuscombe 14:24, 18 November 2007 (EST)

• Since you have absolutely no idea what real plagiarism is, JBuscombe, I invite you to discuss before deciding on your own authority (since you have none) to make wholesale removals and undo the work of long-time editors here. --şyŝoρ-₮K^{/Ṣρёаќǃ} 15:55, 18 November 2007 (EST)

Challenges

(For use by judges only)

Sschultz entry points(2-0)

This matter was referred for determination under the rules for Contest3. The locus of this dispute revolves around the contributions of User:SSchultz. Some of his articles are felt to be silly, thereby becoming an attempt to game the system and unworthy of merit. Is a "silly article" worthy of points?

We, the Judges feel that this should not be so. The rules are clear. Entries should be of value and, most importantly, educational. Consequently, we approve the striking of all points given during this contest for uneducational/silly articles/edits. this determination is universal and applies to all editors.

APPROVED AS TO FORM;

Geo.^Complain! 21:04, 24 November 2007 (EST)
HelpJazz 21:10, 24 November 2007 (EST)

Addendum

We, the Judges, feel that due to the lack of recordkeeping on the part of SSchultz, false claims of credit, and blatant overcrediting, his score will not be counted into the official total.

Geo.^Complain! 21:38, 24 November 2007 (EST)
HelpJazz 00:06, 25 November 2007 (EST)

This is a complete travesty. Lack of recordkeeping? Every edit I made is linked on my contest score page. If poor recordkeeping is an issue, then I challenge every point by ASchlafly and GregLarson since neither individual enumerated any of their edits and calculations. False claims of credit and overcrediting? The one point of controversy here was my use of a template to increase my score, and I conceded that point on day 1 and retracted the points. If you feel specific articles should have been scored differently, then by all means retabulate my score. But I certainly have not cheated, I resent the entirety of my contribution being stripped as some sort of juvenile penalty, and I'm tired of being the whipping boy for a poorly designed set of rules and for following practices performed in prior contests without so much as a second glance. SSchultz 15:43, 25 November 2007 (EST)