This page is for the listing and details of proposals from the War Room which have been rejected several times.

Topics here may not be brought up again with the same reasoning. If they are, they will most likely be deleted on the spot. If a user wishes to revisit the topic, they must provide sufficiently differentiating reasoning than that which is listed on this page.

In order to propose a new topic to add to this list, just add the topic to the talk page. Note that the topic must have been rejected several times.

Topics Edit

Restricting/Banning Blogging Edit

Previously failed forums
Forum 1 Forum:Blogging solutions
Forum 2 Forum:Blogging
Forum 3 Forum:Blogging Policy
Forum 4 Forum:Blog posts
Reasonings behind the failed forums
Blogging used to be subject to much controversy on this wiki - this was due to an increase in off-topic blogs, which many thought served as a distraction to more important procedures. Off-topic blogs were eventually cracked down on, and now, there are no off-topic blogs. The transition from blogs being used mainly to express off-topic feelings, to blogs being used mainly to report and comment on news, was due to the cessation of off-topic blogs. Since the primary reasoning behind banning blogs in the past are no longer relevant, and any other rationale used having failed several times, this topic is effectively sealed until new arguments are provided.

Restricting anon commenting Edit

Previously failed forums
Forum 1 Forum:Prevent unregistered users from participating in blogs and forums
Forum 2 Forum:Should this wiki start regulating Anon posts?
Reasonings behind the failed forums
It is often felt that anonymous users are an inconvenience when it comes to blogs and that they cause more trouble than what they're worth. This formed the backbone for the two forums listed above; anons were often cited as being the root cause for the large amount of trolling, flaming, and other inappropriate conduct which can be found in blog comments. Due to this conclusion being unprovable, and that an unregistered user has just the same ability to violate the UTP as a registered user, these forums did not pass. In addition, restricting the permissions of anonymous users in such a way is a violation of Wikia's Terms of Use, and as such, cannot be done.

Banning images of only a certain topic Edit

Previously failed forums
Forum 1 Forum:Preventing usage of pony icons
Forum 2 Forum:My Little Pony Pics
Forum 3 Forum:Banning pony images from being uploaded to the wiki
Reasonings behind the failed forums
There were several forums to deal with My Little Pony images/avatars, all of which were not successful. It was often stated that MLP pictures were irrelevant to Call of Duty, and this formed the main backbone of the argument to ban MLP pictures in Forum 3. The other 2 forums' arguments consisted of them "looking stupid." All of these reasons were put down by the opposition.

Ban the upload of personal images Edit

Example forums
Forum 1 Forum:Personal Images
Forum 2 Forum:Personal images and what to do with them
Reasonings behind the failed forums
Personal images are a topic of concern on the wiki for most users. With the majority of supports on threads concerning either personal images in general or of a certain topic stating that they "don't like them". If any new thread that has the majority of support saying they dislike them or that the forum itself says that personal images should be prevented from upload with the reason stated previously, it should be closed.

Ban X user forums Edit

This is a slightly different entry - it is not so much that these fail, but more that these are not decisions for the community as a whole to make, and as such, are never to be discussed by the community in the War Room.

Example forums
Forum 1 Forum:Permabanning TheManOfIron. (also the talk page)
Forum 2 Forum:Banning Ikin
Reasoning for disallowing these types of forum
Simply put - banning users is a purely administrative decision. Openly discussing in the community bans for the user in question only serves to lengthen out a process which does not require unneeded bureaucracy. Also, it can often become a battlefield for users, as is the case with Forum 1, where the user who proposed the ban was later shown to have created the forum out of spite. In order to keep blocking an efficient process, and to not exasperate the situation further or cause disruption within the community, blocking users is a decision to be made and mediated by administrators only.

Using the YouTube channel for X Edit

Example forums
Forum 1 Forum:To kickoff the YouTube channel
Forum 2 Forum:Weapon demonstration videos
Forum 3 Forum:CoDWikiOfficial article videos
Forum 4 Forum:Ideas for the Youtube Channel
Forum 5 Forum:CoD wiki Weapon guides
Reasoning for disallowing these types of forum
Forums regarding the Call of Duty Wiki's YouTube channel have often come up. These can range from simply revitalising it, or talking about using it for specific functions. All of these forums often started strong, but quickly lost interest, and in the end no changes were ever made. Due to consistent lack of outcomes, it is not to be discussed in the War Room any longer.

Unamed Middle Eastern Country locations Edit

Example forums
Forum 1 Forum:Unamed Middle Eastern Country locations
Forum 2 Forum:Unnamed Middle Eastern Country Locations Redux
Reasoning for disallowing these types of forum
While there has been only 2 forums on the matter there has been plenty of discussion about the locations on talk pages. This lead to the first forum where we decided to use in-game satellite images and pair them up with Google map images, using the quotes to help guide us. This was the accepted solution until other users started using more specific information, uch as the architectural design seen in levels, to try and disprove this. Due to the in-game satellite images disproving this, this was deemed to close to IRL. With the release of Moder Warfare Remastered the pages were edited to new locations based smaller maps that game used and the second forum was created soon after this was spotted. The game used the same load screens, and as such same satellite images, as before and the new small maps seen on the mision select screen were too inaccurate to get any helpful information off. Soon the discussions fell in to the same pitfall as the first forum using information that was deemed too close to IRL. As the user putting this information forward failed to continue contributing the vote merely asked if the issue should be moved to PRP or not.