The status of builds is constantly in flux. The metagame shifts, game updates nerf/buff skills or effect caps, builds are revamped and re-written. Some or all of these factors may effect a builds validity. As a result, previously bad builds may become good, and vice versa. In order to stay abreast of these changes, PvX uses Re-Votes as a tool to help ensure that PvX is able to change in accordance to changes to those builds.


The Real Vetting Extension allows for two means of re-voting, both of which can be appropriately applied to allow for re-voting.

Below are general guidelines as to when these two methods should be applied.

Please note that as stated above, these are merely general guidelines. It is left largely to users, particularly the Administrators to determine both whether a re-vote is necessary, as well as what method should be applied.

Amending Votes

In many cases, while a build may have its validity effected as a result of one or more of the situations above, there is not an immediate consensus as to the exact nature of the impact of those changes. In these cases, it is usually best to leave the votes intact, but, alert voters that they should re-evaluate their votes. This can be accomplished via the notification template, found [[here]].

These tags can either be distributed to all voters (as in the case of a build update that fundamentally changes a build's viability), or can be sent to specific users whose comments may have been rendered null and void.

Re-Voting on Tested Builds

In particular, cases in which a builds validity is brought into question can be hard to address. In most cases, these builds were of value at one point, and, it is usually best to err on the side of caution. As a result, it is usually better to allow users to amend their votes themselves, rather than simply deleting those votes.

As an additional note, if a tested is re-voted on and unfavored, there are two options. If the build was good at one point, it should be moved to Archive. However, builds that are deemed to have never belonged in favored (i.e. they were incorrectly favored or should not have been favored) should be moved to the Trash category.

Deleting Votes

While notification tags may be added by any user, only Administrators have the authority to actually delete votes. Users may request that an Administrator review vote(s), via the Administrative Review template found [[here]]. This power should be reserved for instances where a build's validity has been effected so substantially by one of the three situations above (or any similar situation) so as to render it fundamentally different such that a complete re-vote is imperative. In cases of deletion, it is the responsibility of the administrator to distribute notification tags.

Users may also request that specific votes be deleted. Again, this should only be done in cases in which vote(s) are clearly and obviously incorrect or entirely based on a false or no longer true assumption. Cases in which only a part of a vote is based on a false premise should utilize the first option since it is not clear that the vote hinges on a false principle.

It is important to realize that while the first option, that of merely calling for re-evaluation, is usually the most appropriate, not all users will respond to the notification tags. If, after a reasonable length of time, users have not responded in any manner, either by amending their votes, or by responding on the appropriate talk page, Administrators may be called upon to make a decision regardless of whether the matter is clear cut.

Builds which have all of their votes deleted should be moved back into the Testing category.

Re-Voting on Unfavored Builds

Unlike with Tested builds, Unfavored builds are usually re-voted upon as a result of a complete revamping of the page, or in the case of a major update. Subtle shifts in the meta-game are less likely to effect an unfavored build. Furthermore, there is little harm that can be done by requiring that an unfavored build be completely re-evaluated. As such, deletion of previous votes can at times be a more simple method of re-evaluation.


While the three situations mentioned at the top of the page do at times warrant a re-vote, they by no means always warrant a re-vote. Accordingly, users who abuse re-votes by repeatedly calling for re-evaluation when it is clearly not warranted may be banned.

Similarly while any user may distribute the notification tags, abuse of these tags, particularly in instances where a user is merely unhappy with or dislikes a vote, may result in a ban.