Forum:CT Archive/FAN/GAN subpage proposal

OK. After an SH discussion, I'm bringing the issue of transitioning the FAN and GAN pages to subpages as laid out in that thread.

Links:
 * Sample GAN page (static snapshot from over a month ago): Clicking section edit links takes you directly to the individual nomination. FAN page would work the same way.
 * New GAnom and FAnom templates to handle subpages: These work in the same way as Tc and provide simple step-by-step directions. Clicking the redlink brings up a preloaded form, as well as a special editintro giving basic instructions for new nominators. Note that the preloads and editintros won't work until they are copied into the Template: namespace.

Advantages over the current system:
 * The main FAN/GAN pages look almost identical to the way they appear now.
 * Editing individual nominations is much easier due to smaller page sizes and multiple section headers.
 * Both nominators and objectors can watch an individual nomination without having to watch the whole page (watching the main page can also be useful for receiving notification of new noms).

Advantage over the GAN subpage trial from one year ago:
 * Nominations are rather than linked on the main pages, eliminating the "out of sight, out of mind" issue that prompted the AC to reject the idea.

Possible disadvantages:
 * The process of nominating a new article is slightly more complicated with the addition of the extra step of transcluding the new subpage on the main page. I feel this, however, is minor, as both the nom templates and the editintro that appears during the creation of the subpage make it clear what needs to be done and give the exact code for easy copy-and-paste.
 * The actual process of converting the FAN/GAN pages over to this new system may be complicated and time-consuming, but I volunteer to perform the transition myself unless the AC or Inq would prefer to do it themselves.

Please approach this with an open mind. I really dislike it when people vote against a proposal simply because "the current system works" or "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." IMO there are three faults in that line of thinking here:
 * 1) Just because "the current system works" doesn't mean it can't work better or more efficiently. No matter how well something works, there is usually a way to improve on the current design. As my father likes to say, "If it ain't broke, make it better anyway."
 * 2) Secondly, the system is broken. Among the complaints: said he can't edit the FAN page from his phone due to the size of the page;  has complained about lag in the edit box, which comes from the large amount of text in it (this is purely an IE issue, but not one I feel should be ignored); and I believe a few users have complained about the difficulty of watching a single nomination. These are all valid complaints that are addressed in some way by this proposal.
 * 3) Finally, the great thing about a wiki is that nothing is permanent. If unforeseen issues come up or we just don't like it, we can always vote to go back to the old system.

Support

 * 1) As proposer. &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 19:38, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion
As usual, please do not add new voting options without discussion here first. Thank you. &mdash;Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 19:38, May 16, 2010 (UTC)