Fandom

Wookieepedia

Wookieepedia:AgriCorps/Log/2010 April 17

< Wookieepedia:AgriCorps

133,510pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Talk0
[22:01] <Toprawa> Welcome to AC Meeting 21.
[22:01] <Toprawa> Thanks for showing up.
[22:01] <Toprawa> First thing is the lone probed article from last meeting.
[22:01] <Toprawa> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kelbis_Nu
[22:01] <Toprawa> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:AC/Kelbis_Nu_(second_review)
[22:01] <Toprawa> Naru claims to have fixed everything.
[22:01] <Toprawa> I cannot vouch for the changes, personally
[22:02] <GrandMoffTranner> It looks better.
[22:02] <Toprawa> Jugs votes keep.
[22:02] <GrandMoffTranner> But I'm not familiar with any of the material, so I can't say for certain.
[22:03] <Toprawa> It passes the look test, and I have no further issues myself
[22:03] <Toprawa> I vote keep as well
[22:03] <Cylka> Work was put into it, so I say keep.
[22:03] <GrandMoffTranner> Keep.
[22:03] <Toprawa> Kelbis Nu kept.
[22:03] <Cylka> It looks good, but I don't know the material either.
[22:03] <Toprawa> On to new articles.
[22:03] <Toprawa> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/U-E
[22:03] <Toprawa> U-E - redlink issues. Plus I don't really know what reference 3 is supposed to mean. If that's an article from the Omnibus, perhaps it needs its own article? Toprawa and Ralltiir 19:00, March 28, 2010 (UTC)
[22:04] <Toprawa> No change.
[22:04] <Toprawa> I say probe.
[22:04] <GrandMoffTranner> Probe it.
[22:04] <Cylka> Probe.
[22:04] <Cylka> Ref 3 probably means that someone was lazy and never created an article or redlink for the article.
[22:04] <Toprawa> Grunny and Jugs vote probe as well.
[22:05] <Toprawa> U-E probed.
[22:05] <Toprawa> Most likely
[22:05] <Toprawa> I have another article not on the list.
[22:05] <Cylka> Go ahead.
[22:05] <Toprawa> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Acklay
[22:05] <Toprawa> Article has since had one or two more appearances added to it.
[22:05] <Toprawa> I'm sure some information can be gotten from them
[22:06] <Toprawa> Even if it's a sentence or two at most.
[22:06] <GrandMoffTranner> Which appearances would those be?
[22:06] <Toprawa> one was a TCW episode
[22:06] <Toprawa> I think someone made a comparison to something being like an acklay
[22:06] <Toprawa> That should be mentioned, I think
[22:07] <Cylka> And there is also the non canon Robot Chicken  app. that could go in the Bts.
[22:07] <GrandMoffTranner> Sounds like it should be probed then.
[22:07] <Cylka> I say probe.
[22:07] <Toprawa> I can work with Chack on it.
[22:07] <Toprawa> Probe as well
[22:07] <Toprawa> Acklay probed then.
[22:08] <Toprawa> Unless anyone has anything else, moving on.
[22:08] <Toprawa> Discussion items:
[22:08] <Toprawa> Discuss changing the 3 week nom inactivity rule to 2 weeks. Jonjedigrandmaster  (We seed the stars) 22:08, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
[22:08] <Toprawa> Pretty straightforward.
[22:08] <Toprawa> Grunny and Jugs support.
[22:08] <Cylka> Sounds good.
[22:09] <GrandMoffTranner> As do I. Support.
[22:09] <Cylka> Support.
[22:09] <Toprawa> Support as well.
[22:09] <Toprawa> New rule enacted - idle nom limit is now 2 weeks
[22:09] <Toprawa> Implementation of Rule 1 more strictly with the removal poorly-written noms. Jonjedigrandmaster  (We seed the stars) 22:08, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
[22:09] <Toprawa> This is more of a literal "discussion"
[22:10] <Toprawa> The thinking is that we can and should be enforcing this as a requirement for some of our more lacking nominations
[22:10] <Toprawa> There's a reason they sit there, because they're lacking, to put it nicely.
[22:11] <Toprawa> Thoughts?
[22:11] <GrandMoffTranner> I'm willing to support this, but I'd like to see more details on how this would be implemented.
[22:11] <Cylka> I agree, but we should now detail what well-written is.
[22:11] <GrandMoffTranner> Yes
[22:11] <Toprawa> I don't know myself, but I believing the thinking is that we be more liberal about starting removal votes for shitting nominations based on this alone.
[22:11] <Cylka> For example - minor to no grammar mistakes.
[22:11] <Toprawa> shitty*
[22:12] <Toprawa> bleh
[22:12] <Toprawa> which I have no problem with
[22:12] <Cylka> Same for spelling mistakes.
[22:12] <Toprawa> Thoughts?
[22:12] <Cylka> Maybe start with those two details as a basis. We could probably get rid of a couple noms based on these two alone.
[22:13] -->| ChackJadson (~chatzilla@wikia/ChackJadson) has joined #wookieepedia-agricorps
[22:13] =-= Mode #wookieepedia-agricorps +o ChackJadson by chanserv
[22:13] <Toprawa> That was what influenced this point, I believe
[22:13] <Toprawa> What Cylka just said
[22:13] <Toprawa> Hey Chack
[22:13] <GrandMoffTranner> That sounds good to me.
[22:13] <GrandMoffTranner> Hey Chack.
[22:13] <ChackJadson> Hey guys
[22:13] <Cylka> Hey Chack.
[222:13] <ChackJadson> What's up?
[22:13] <GrandMoffTranner> The meeting.
[22:13] <Toprawa> Chack, we're discussing: <Toprawa>	Implementation of Rule 1 more strictly with the removal poorly-written noms. Jonjedigrandmaster (We seed the stars) 22:08, March 25, 2010 (UTC)
[22:13] <ChackJadson> I know, sorry I'm late
[22:13] <ChackJadson> Ok
[22:14] <Cylka> We are thinking of starting with removing noms having more than just minor grammar and spelling mistakes.
[22:14] <Toprawa> We're discussing be more liberal about starting removal votes for lacking noms based on Rule 1: Must be well-written
[22:14] <Toprawa> I encourage this.
[22:14] <Cylka> We can add to what "well-written" means.
[22:16] <Cylka> Just to be clear:
[22:17] <Cylka> We are staring to remove noms based on more than minor spelling and grammar mistakes at the moment?
[22:17] <Toprawa> Yes
[22:17] <Cylka> Ok.
[22:17] <GrandMoffTranner> In any case, I support this idea. Something needs to be done.
[22:17] <Cylka> Yes, support.
[22:17] <Toprawa> Support
[22:17] <ChackJadson> Support
[22:17] <Toprawa> Grunny and Jugs support as well
[22:18] <Toprawa> Ok, Rule 1 enforcement agreed upon
[22:18] <Toprawa> ZOMG very important!! Discuss adding a limit of 24 hours to snowball noms, like on the FAN page. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:55, April 3, 2010 (UTC)
[22:18] <Toprawa> Basically, a nom must be on the page for at least 24 hours
[22:18] <Toprawa> Regardless of how many snowball votes it gets
[22:18] <GrandMoffTranner> Sounds good to me.
[22:18] <ChackJadson> Support
[22:18] <Cylka> Support.
[22:19] <Toprawa> Jugs and Grunny support
[22:19] <Toprawa> As do I
[22:19] <Toprawa> 24-hour rule enacted.
[22:20] <Toprawa> That's all for the agenda.
[22:20] <Toprawa> Does anyone have anything else?
[22:20] <Cylka> Is this it, then?
[22:21] <Cylka> Meeting over?
[22:22] <Cylka> ...
[22:22] <Toprawa> Do we have anything else?
[22:22] <GrandMoffTranner> I guess not.
[22:22] <GrandMoffTranner> Aside from world domination, of course. :p
[22:22] <ChackJadson> haha
[22:22] <Toprawa> Ok, meeting adjourned.

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki