Talk:Buses

Open to suggestions

Hi all, admin here.

Feel free to share any suggestions that can help improve sgWiki, which includes improving/revamping the guidelines, which were too harsh on our former and existing editors.

Just a heads up, I will not be imposing any penalty on any disruptive editing for now, with an exemption for individuals who deliberately harass any of the existing or inactive users here.

Also, I would like to thank every editor who invested time and effort in keeping the wiki running. Appreciate it a lot.

Cheers, SMB315C

Suggestions

1. Revamp the Guidelines

Tone down harsh wording

Replace rigid, punitive language ("will be blocked", "strictly prohibited") with more constructive phrasing ("please avoid", "may be reverted", "we encourage"). This helps new editors feel guided, not threatened.

Tiered expectations

Create different sets of rules for:

New editors (basic formatting, citing, no vandalism).

Experienced editors (style consistency, formatting details, advanced citations). This avoids overwhelming beginners with complex standards.

Positive framing

Showcase "good practices" with examples rather than just "do nots." For example, before/after edits illustrating clean formatting or proper references.

2. Improve Onboarding

Beginner-friendly sandbox/tutorial

A clear "Start here" page where new editors can practice formatting without consequences.

Mentorship or buddy system

Experienced editors can volunteer to guide newcomers for their first few edits.

Quick-start guides

Condensed cheat sheets (e.g., "Top 5 things to know before editing") instead of making users scroll through long rule pages.

3. Community Culture

Encourage collaboration, not policing Replace strict "enforcement" with "community improvement." For example, instead of scolding mistakes, allow small fixes by others and leave a polite edit summary explaining the change.

Recognition

Badges or userbarns for milestones (100 edits, 1,000 edits, quality contributions).

Monthly "Featured Editor" to spotlight consistent contributors.

Feedback channels

Make a dedicated, low-barrier space (like a Help Desk or Discord server) for editors to ask questions without judgment.

4. Editorial Process

Soft reverts

Instead of instantly deleting new edits, consider a system where questionable edits are flagged for review rather than reverted outright.

Revise not punish

When rules are broken (except vandalism), allow editors to revise their work with guidance instead of issuing warnings/blocks too quickly.

Consensus-driven updates

Revise guidelines collaboratively (maybe a yearly community consultation) so editors feel ownership, not top-down enforcement.

5. Transparency & Evolution

Public changelog for rules

Editors can see when/why guidelines were updated. This builds trust.

Community polls

Use surveys/votes to decide on big rule changes (e.g., formatting standards, citation requirements).

“Editor feedback loop”(What we are doing now)

Periodically ask: What rule feels most unfair/unclear? and adjust accordingly.

👉 In short: the key is softening the tone, lowering entry barriers, and building a sense of belonging rather than fear of punishment.

Regards,

SBS5251K (with the help of ChatGPT)