PvXwiki
m (→‎Current Meta Caretakers: many apologies)
mNo edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
 
This policy outlines the role and responsibilities of the '''Meta Caretakers'''.
 
This policy outlines the role and responsibilities of the '''Meta Caretakers'''.
   
MCs are users who have an understanding of high-end PvP (GvG and HA) that qualifies them to make calls on whether a given GvG/HA build is Meta, fringe, or non-viable in the current metagame.
+
MCs are users who have an understanding of the [[Guide:PvP Metagame|high-end PvP (GvG and HA) metagame]] that qualifies them to make calls on whether a given GvG/HA build is Meta, fringe, or non-viable in the current metagame.
   
 
PvE and low-end PvP MCs are not being appointed, as the metagames of these areas do not change frequently enough to need a special position to maintain the meta sections. Community consensus will be relied upon for recognizing the PvE and low-end PvP metas.
 
PvE and low-end PvP MCs are not being appointed, as the metagames of these areas do not change frequently enough to need a special position to maintain the meta sections. Community consensus will be relied upon for recognizing the PvE and low-end PvP metas.

Revision as of 06:04, 5 November 2010

This policy outlines the role and responsibilities of the Meta Caretakers.

MCs are users who have an understanding of the high-end PvP (GvG and HA) metagame that qualifies them to make calls on whether a given GvG/HA build is Meta, fringe, or non-viable in the current metagame.

PvE and low-end PvP MCs are not being appointed, as the metagames of these areas do not change frequently enough to need a special position to maintain the meta sections. Community consensus will be relied upon for recognizing the PvE and low-end PvP metas.

Responsibilities

  • MCs can post HA/GvG builds straight into the Meta category.
  • MCs have the final say on whether a build is in the GvG or HA metagame.
  • If the metagame changes such that a build is no longer viable, they should archive the build as per PvX:VETTING.

Conduct

  • MCs are still expected to adhere to all other PvXwiki policies.
  • If a user and MC get into a conflict over the Meta status of a build, the MC's decision will be enforced by the Administrators.

Requests for Meta Caretaker

The RfMC process follows the same procedure as an RfA. The difference is simply in the role, and that no new user group will be created for Meta Caretakers, as they have no special editing rights that would require it. As with the RfA process, bureaucrats will be responsible for promotion/failing of RfMCs.

Active Nominations

No active nominations at this time.

Instructions

This simple three-step plan was adopted from GuildWiki in order to facilitate nominations.

  1. Insert the following text in the active nominations section above, underneath any existing entries:
    {{{{subst:FULLPAGENAME}}/Username}}
    Where "Username" is the name of the nominee.
  2. Proceed to click on the red link created by the 1st template, and insert:
    {{subst:rfmc1|Username|Rationale for nomination. ~~~~}}
    Be sure to fill in the second argument with your actual rationale and to sign and date it.
  3. Finally, insert the following templates at the top of the nominee's talk page:
    {{subst:rfmc2|Username}}
    This template will alert the user that he/she has been nominated.

Note: The nomination itself counts as a "support" vote. The nominator does not vote on the RfMC.

Current Meta Caretakers