10

We don't un-wiki posts unless there's a very compelling reason to, and CW'ing to avoid gaining rep certainly doesn't fall into that category. Using CW to avoid rep loss on a post expected to net negative rep is really the only questionable use for it, and given current guidance (below) even that would not be reason to un-wiki the post(s). If someone ...


8

My gut instinct is to say no, for the simple reason that the OP didn't just post a list of the current films and then abandon it. Since it was posted, they've made an additional 14 edits with their original text and additional changes representing some 90% of the current text. As such, their contribution to this answer represents a significant investment of ...


8

This answer should be marked as community wiki or another one should be posted as such in its place. The thing is general practice with these sorts of posts in the past has been to post an initial answer as Community Wiki and then other users edit it. For example see these: Who is who on this Doctor Who Christmas Card? Can we identify all the characters in ...


7

In the case of a mass id question I think it is almost always favourable to have a community wiki answer that everyone can contribute to. After all one big comprehensive answer is always better than dozens of partial ones. That isn't to say we haven't had cases of a single user doing almost all or all of the work but a big community effort is generally what ...


7

Done. But just FYI, flagging is probably a quicker way to go about this than a meta post. Moderators do follow meta, but raising a custom flag is the best way to contact mods specifically, and nobody else reading meta can really help you here.


7

We should not do anything. Per this question and the two answers, "no answer should be made CW". Sure, a user may choose to make an answer community wiki should they feel so, but it's never an obligation. We could break this down by pros and cons: Pros: None? If I understand this correctly, the only thing that will change is the amount of rep required to ...


7

The answer to the question "Should I make this post Community Wiki" is nearly always going to be "No". No answer must be community wiki The Community Wiki feature is a tool to encourage collaboration; it is not a mandate, and there is nothing either in the community-at-large or in the SE system saying "This Shalt Be CW"1. Much ...


6

The automatic conversion of answers to community wikis has been removed, so this should not be an issue moving forward. From the blog: Therefore, we have removed all automatic Wiki conversion triggers from the software. No longer will answers with more than some arbitrary number of edits, or questions with more than a page of answers suddenly lose their ...


6

First, you've only made 8 edits (revision 9), so you have one more before the next makes it CW. A moderator can only undo CW, not prevent it. The auto-CW is primarily intended to prevent users from making periodic edits to bump their posts so they get more votes. You have clearly not been abusing it in that manner, so if you trigger CW, flag it and a mod ...


5

An answer should be made community wiki only when it's such a collaborative effort that no single person wants to take full credit for it. If many different people have contributed comparable amounts of input to an answer, making it community wiki is a way to ensure that the collaborative effort put into the post gets recognition without any single user ...


5

The problem here is that your question is very broad and not a little dull. It's not unanswerable, but doing so would require someone to put in an inordinate amount of effort for a question that is very poorly scoped. I'm reasonably sure that any of the users mentioned above could answer it if they were minded to (as could you), so it's just a matter of ...


4

YES! But evaluated on a case by case basis... Having been involved in asking and answering a few of these questions I find that there end up being lots of one line/item answers that can quickly add up. Judging from the review queues these answers are not well received and are down-voted and often times deleted. To be fair to the poster of the answer, a ...


3

I'm pretty sure that you do, so long as it's relatively quick, but I'm not really sure, so... If it does work, it shouldn't take very long. The reputation is supposed to be updated in near real time.


2

I'm not sure if this would be overkill or not, and I'm really only active on a few tags here, so if this suggestion doesn't fit, feel free to downvote to oblivion. I feel like these questions would be well handled by making a tag for these types of questions, and requiring, as a policy, that they be made into a community wiki. I basically stole this idea ...


2

Does this mean I can now use the Community Wiki to avoid upvotes and downvotes on poor quality answers? No. CW does two things: Prevents you from gaining or losing rep. Lowers the rep requirement for editing. Neither of those two things has anything whatsoever to do with how voting behaves. CW answers can rise and fall like any other, get grayed out ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible