User:MarketPliers/On documenting namefags

This page is an essayYou will remind the author that their English assignment is due at 9 PM sharp.

Following the vote to redirect Supreme's page to the List of SoyBooru namefags and subsequent action wiping out an article of a notable namefag for his rule violations and potentially putting more articles at risk of redirection or deletion due to them documenting people who have been banned for grave rule violations either temporarily or permanently, and those who are viewed with extreme negativity within the 'sphere, I suggest new proposed changes to the manual of style in order to clarify what does and doesn't disqualify a person from having their own article.

Cobblestone's proposed Dossier template which will allow users to fill out and substitute include as a bare minimum for what a namefag needs to be at a bare minimum is a good start to but it brings up the issue of what to do with undesirables being given unneeded and undeserved attention which will likely result in this very wiki ending up in the same trappings as SNCApedia, effectively becoming a massive doctoddlering circlejerk.

The proposed namefag namespace will also inevitably result in failtrolls documenting themselves, my suggested changes will effectively stop this from happening.

Proposed changes

I suggest the notability clause in the manual of style be rewritten as follows:

• You WILL NOT make pages on random namefags. In general, namefags qualify for the main namespace if they:
  • Played a substantial role in the creation or popularization of a meme, event, variant, trend, community, or soysphere website.
  • Held a significant administrative, cultural, or historical role within the soysphere.
  • Have enough independently documented history to justify a full article.

    ---

  • Were NOT permanently banned from any soysphere site at any point for:
    • Uploading, posting, requesting, or linking to illegal content.
    • Posting, promoting, or advocating for pedophilia or pedophilic content, including pedophilic jokes.
    • Advertising or participating in disruptive communities.
    • Posting, promoting, or advocating for animal abuse or bestiality.
    • Posting suicide announcements or genuinely attempting to push others towards suicide or self-harm.
  • Were NOT under the age of 18 during their tenure.
  • Were NOT solely a baitfag. (May be overruled at moderator or administrator discretion)
  • Grandfather clause: Articles created before 24 July 2026 are exempt from the above criteria regarding bans and age.

Reasoning

Allowing the documentation of failtrolls has always been a contentious topic on the wiki, as this often just results in them feeling good about having been horrible enough to be documented, rather than what should actually happen which is their name slipping into irrelevance and being forgotten.

My opinion is that all future failtrolls should go undocumented publically and their names, actions, and common behavior should be known to staff only as otherwise nusois will just go around doctoddlering at the bogeyman of the month, instead we should encourage documentation of namefags who have contributed positively to the community.

As the main soysphere sites have differences in their rules I've opted to write out the rules which forbid a namefag from being documented.

On controversy-farming

Many namefags have a habit of being as obnoxious as possible in order to effectively speedrun fulfilling the notability criteria by baitfagging and intentionally bending the rules until they break (particularly rule 2 for whatever reason), I suggest being much more strict on pages on namefags being made for people who are actively only on the site to stir up drama.

This will in turn encourage articles on namefags who are actively posting gems or otherwise contributing significantly to the soymmunity in order to not have the site continue to spiral into a negativity spiral as has been observed on the 'ru.

Grandfather clause

I've opted to include a grandfather clause as this change would otherwise affect large swathes of articles, utterly ruining the page history, and is generally just needless deletionism for most of these "people" are already dead and irrelevant, despite how much I want to see these names be forgotten.