VRCWiki talk:Notability
Notability for groups.
I'm curious for the ability for Groups to be added to the Community section, So where "worlds,avatars,guides" are. I belive adding a new section for groups within community content to allow users to create Group Info pages for groups such as Offline, The Cauldron, Ministry promotions and more, However I'm not sure where this could fall under notability. My most optimal out-look for groups being able to be listed on the wiki is if they are demonstraghting the ability to maintain events such as music events or have a certain member count, Say 250+ to be fair to smaller communitys(?). Comfy Chloe (talk) 14:14, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
- The inital idea behind the community space is to have informative pages. We decided to not allow groups directly to prevent repeating just another "gaming, drinking, party" group with a million users. We expected groups with the same goals to share the same page. Communities with own worlds (meating criterias) could also have there worlds on the wiki.
- Me personally are all for allowing more content in every direction on the wiki, but I'm mostly alone in the wiki Team with this mindset. Hackebein (talk) 07:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- I don't intend to just "write" about groups, My thoughts on having more public information on user groups were to focus on "Active" and general to promote, I understand the potetional issues, but everyone on the wiki should remember that this Is indeed a Wiki, Everything here should be unbiased and easy to understand, If there is content restrictions it should be for vaild reasons, Notiability is the Only primary reason I can come up with that can cause restriction on "what" or "which" groups could be publicly displayed here, Generally speaking I see no problems talking about Known public rave groups aslong as I withhold to using the standard of posting the Wiki asks of me, I see no issue or restriction, Since no pages exisits for groups are user pages free-create?
- Say I were to make Community:Groups:Offline, Would that work for wiki links? I'm still relevetivly new to editting and want to make sure I don't mess-up an edit or miswrite anything, If the wiki-team can't even answer my question I will make the page(s) and leave the team to Move the page where appropriate. Comfy Chloe (talk) 07:52, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- > Since no pages exisits for groups are user pages free-create?
- You are always free to create as long as it follows our guidelines and policies. Pages in User-Contect (starting with "User:") are excluded from most guidelines and policies.
- > Say I were to make Community:Groups:Offline, Would that work for wiki links?
- yes you could make the page but it would mean the page is in "Community:" context and the name of the page would be "Groups:Offline". i hope that makes sense. You can always check if you can create a page if you navigate to the page: Community:Groups:Offline Hackebein (talk) 08:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- Ok thank you, I will work with the creator of Offline and other groups before I create the page to confirm I don't make any mistakes or provide incorrect information, However I would really appritate if other members of the wiki-team could help clarify somethings such as my inital request, I understand you are a moderator but you are one of, However meny moderate this wiki, I've seen quite a few changes under "recent changes" and would like to gather as much knowlage what is and isn't ok, Its very difficult to be in my position without feedback from the full-team (or atleast 2 more members), No offence to you @Hackebein Just more perspectives from more wiki members are diverse and more helpful to get an issue resolve more smoothly without bumps/issues. Comfy Chloe (talk) 08:32, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- In past edits, for pages, such as VRRat, Steel 'n' Gold, and Community:Trans Academy, I double down to mention their notable groups. I'd say that if a user has a page for a world, and the same user has a notable group regarding that community or content, I think it would be safe to say that it can be added to the article. I like Hackebein's answer too. DAG-XR (talk) 22:32, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Proposal: Notability revision (April2025)
Our notability policy was implemented on July 25th 2024, only a couple of months since we started working on the wiki. We had a small revision for the inclusion of Avatars, but it remained the same. Since then, a lot has happened, such as the release of the Creator Economy.
This revision aims to better align the notability policy to the release of the Creator Economy, and the upcoming Avatar Marketplace. It also aims to broaden and simplify the notability criteria. This policy revision does not include an update on the exclusions section, as that is a bigger issue that requires its own talk subject.
You can view my draft for the revised policy here: https://wiki.vrchat.com/wiki/User:Usr_c0fd3826-5fbd-465b-869b-142f974af714/sandbox/notabilityv2
My reasoning behind the changes:
- Criteria expanding
- By broadening the list of criteria and including clear examples, it should be easier for users to understand what makes a world or avatar notable. This added clarity helps reduce confusion and sets better expectations.
- Manual worlds/avatar rows
- By limiting rows that been manually added with "admin" tags, it ensures junk doesn't pile in. Compared to "system" tags that get assigned automatically, or "game" and "avatar" tags, each world has been seen and approved by a VRChat staff member.
- Creator Economy guideline
- This is another way to ensure junk doesn't pile in. VRChat will obviously continue to open up the Creator Economy to the general public, these types of worlds should not get a "free pass". For example, "club world #657".
