Wikia

Wookieepedia

Wookieepedia:AgriCorps/Log/2010 April 17

Talk0
114,186pages on
this wiki

< Wookieepedia:AgriCorps

[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.

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki