Requests for Comment/Topic ban Qualtipedia

Even after Qualtipedia's closure, the wikis have brought drama to Miraheze Meta. Moreso there was an infamous drama started there and loads of stuff that try to undermine the closure of the wikis and interaction bans, and it has gotten out of control. Therefore I propose that we stop talking about the wikis forever on Meta:

Please keep in mind that this will affect the following wikis:


 * Crappy Games Wiki
 * Awesome Games Wiki
 * Awful Movies Wiki
 * Greatest Movies Wiki
 * Terrible TV Shows & Episodes Wiki
 * Best TV Shows & Episodes Wiki
 * Dreadful Literature Wiki
 * Magnificent Literature Wiki
 * Rotten Websites Wiki
 * Fresh Websites Wiki
 * Qualtipedia Meta Wiki

The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 19:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 1: Topic ban Qualtipedia on Meta forever
Qualtipedia will be banned from being talked about on Meta forever, except for technical purposes. -- The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 19:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Support

 * 1) This topic has been causing a lot of unwanted annoyances for both Meta admins and others. I think it's best we stop the discussion. --Blad  (talk • contribs • accounts • email) 19:31, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * To add on to this, the current state of QP isn't even on Miraheze, so I don't see a need for the discussion at this time. --Blad  (talk • contribs • accounts • email) 21:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) I have enough with the whole reception wikis and its drama and controversies, the only way to stop the drama is actually stopping the discussion related to Qualitipedia and reception wikis in general (with notable exceptions are technical assistance with reception wikis) by implementing a topic ban. Also, we should topic ban anything that has to do with MOAB Glue on anything even outside Miraheze, in addition to supporting this topic ban proposal on Miraheze Meta. TF3RDL (talk &#124; contribs &#124; FANDOM &#124; Wikipedia) 20:19, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Time for folks to move on; opinions are subjective & can be reserved for blog posts in any case Bawitdaba (talk) 21:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This isn't an argument about whether or not Qualitipedia is a good idea, it is an argument about whether or not we should keep talking about it. While I do see why the discussions are getting old, there are many possible reasons that someone will feel the need to talk about Qualitipedia. Also, that is a very poor argument; the wikis were made to document and explain reception. I can understand that some people have a much more detailed argument and that's fair enough, but simply saying this is a poor argument. Money12123 (contribs | CentralAuth) 23:04, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) Was there really a need for another RfC relating to this? --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Oppose
Opposing for stating "Any discussions of Qualtipedia off Meta that result in conflict are considered ban evasion." This is essentially impossible to enforce on Miraheze, seeing as it has over 5000 wikis. --Blad  (talk • contribs • accounts • email) 19:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) There is no reason Qualitipedia should never be discussed here. While it does indeed sometimes cause drama, discussions about Qualitipedia may and probably will be necessary in the future, so topic banning it is ridiculous. Money12123 (contribs | CentralAuth) 20:54, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Drama is a perfectly acceptable reason to ban a topic from being discussed, especially when it happens when someone barely mentions Qualitipedia. --Blad  (talk • contribs • accounts • email) 21:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Belive it or not, I don't mind talking about it. I enjoy talking about it a lot. However, the drama has intensified so that is why I am giving it a weak oppose. --The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) Revoking vote --The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 21:40, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Notwithstanding that there is not much participation in this Request and that is likely to mean that it will be found to have no consensus I would like to record my oppose. I think this Request is misguided and that it is not necessary to "ban" discussion of topics on Meta. The term "forever" is also objectionable and should have instead been "indefinitely". Accepting this proposal would also create a paradox where theoretically it would be impossible to open a Request For Comment to repeal this one because the act of opening the request would be banned under this proposal. If members of the community insist with making Qualitipedia references where they are not appropriate and are persistent in discussing aspects that have been addressed they can be dealt with on a case by case basis by administrators as has already been done. Declarin that a topic is "banned" will not end any drama that may exist. --DeeM28 (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Proposal 2: Topic ban Qualtipedia on Meta for 6 months - 1 year
Qualtipedia will be banned from being talked about on Meta for 6 months to 1 year following this RfC closure, except for technical purposes. --The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 19:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) I don't know about this one. --Blad  (talk • contribs • accounts • email) 20:58, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) I think I've already seen enough of these Qualitipedia-related RfCs for a long time. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 19:16, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This proposal seeks to topic ban Qualtipedia from Meta, which will include RfCs. This sounds more like support. --The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 19:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) My point on the infinite ban still stands. Although this would be temporary, it will be hard to say specifically when another discussion about Qualitipedia will be necessary. Money12123 (contribs | CentralAuth) 20:55, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 2)  Per the vote above this does not considerably improve the position. --DeeM28 (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

General Discussion
Is this request really a draft? Agent Isai Talk to me! 19:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I wanted feedback before I opened this --The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 19:17, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit confused, is this a local RfC (Meta only) or global RfC? If it's the latter, then this request simply has no chance of passing. There are over 5000 wikis. --Blad  (talk • contribs • accounts • email) 19:15, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Local. --The user who loves human heads on alien/animal bodies in cartoons for no reason (talk to me uwu!) 19:16, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

If you would like feedback structurally, I would instead consider giving this subject four headers since it's all the same thing: "Indefinately", "6 months-1 year" (problematic to make that split but for the sake of argument), "Oppose" (against the topic ban entirely) and Comments (obvious). To do this all current votes would need to be struck since this is being treated as an active RfC already. It probably should have been started in your userspace to avoid confusion. Feedback on the idea: unnecessary. Measures to steadily eliminate Qualitipedia (a ban on reception wikis, where the definition cannot avoid covering Qualitipedia as a network) are already successful. The primary culprit of bringing this up unnecessarily and excessively has been removed and will face harsher sanction if he tries to do it again afterwards. This RfC wastes time on an already defunct subject; its attention could be directed to properly defining reception wikis so the ban new creations is properly and fully enacted. I would start it myself but I have several involved drafts to write elsewhere and I'm not quite inspired enough to skip them in favor of this subject. --Raidarr (talk) 20:50, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I would agree with that. Money12123 (contribs | CentralAuth) 23:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)