Inquisitors-in-training.
Inquisition Meeting Times
Americas
UTC-12	Friday 25th 12:00
UTC-11	Friday 25th 13:00
UTC-10 (HST)	Friday 25th 14:00
UTC-9	Friday 25th 15:00
UTC-8 (PST)	Friday 25th 16:00
UTC-7 (MST)	Friday 25th 17:00
UTC-6 (CST)	Friday 25th 18:00
UTC-5 (EST)	Friday 25th 19:00
UTC-4 (AST)	Friday 25th 20:00
UTC-3 (NST)	Friday 25th 21:00
UTC-2	Friday 25th 22:00
Europe and Africa
UTC-1	Friday 25th 23:00
UTC/GMT	Saturday 26th 0:00
UTC+1	Saturday 26th 1:00
UTC+2	Saturday 26th 2:00
Asia and Australasia
UTC+3	Saturday 26th 3:00
UTC+4 (MSK)	Saturday 26th 4:00
UTC+5	Saturday 26th 5:00
UTC+6	Saturday 26th 6:00
UTC+7 (NOVST)	Saturday 26th 7:00
UTC+8 (AWST)	Saturday 26th 8:00
UTC+9 (JST/KST)	Saturday 26th 9:00
UTC+10 (AEST)	Saturday 26th 10:00
UTC+11	Saturday 26th 11:00
UTC+12	Saturday 26th 12:00

Apparently it's time for a meeting. Number nineteen, in fact.

It will take place at 0:00 UTC on Saturday, July 26th, which is 8:00pm Eastern Time on Friday, July 25th for people who can't spell.

Things have been going well recently, I think, and most Inqs are doing their job. However, Greyman has left the site for the foreseeable future, so we're down one trustworthy, active Inq, and there are many Inqs doing either very little or nothing at all. Several others have been discussed, in actual meetings and impromptu ones, and, I think, have been made aware of the Inq's interest in inducting them into our numbers. As it makes most sense to decide on them during the summer holidays, I think we should have a vote. There may also be others people want to bring up.

Also, Ataru has some things he wants to bring up, apparently.

Contents 1 Agenda 1.1 Articles we want to pretend to look at 1.2 Agenda items (expand as needed) 2 Attendance 2.1 Will claim to intend showing up but acknowledges it really is a lottery 2.2 Want to make it look like they have better things to do 2.3 Comments from absentee members 3 Results and summary 3.1 Attendance 3.2 Notably missing from attendance 3.3 Articles reviewed 3.4 Items discussed

AgendaEdit

Articles we want to pretend to look atEdit

• Isolder — probation was extended last meeting and nothing has been done since.
  • I beg to differ. I worked on the article last night and today, and fixed some major stuff the Inqs mentioned at the last meeting. DC 18:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
• Missile Boat — was put on probation last meeting; nothing has been done since.
• Ebon Hawk — no refs in infobox, missing refs in BtS. Overall lacking in BtS. Just not FA-level.
• Battle of Coruscant (Clone Wars), nothing whatsoever from Reversal of Fortune, which was the only source I can remember that reconciled at least parts of both Labyrinth of Evil and Clone Wars. And if that's missing, doubtless there's stuff missing from all kinds of other works. I think this is in dire need of a source-scour. Thefourdotelipsis 23:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
• Battle of Nar Shaddaa — no refs in infobox, missing BtS entirely. No quotes, one image lacks captioning, formatting is just wrong.
• Atha Prime – This article has no P&T section, and was actually rather recently passed. I am somewhat appalled that it passed nomination without one. Graestan^(Talk) 02:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Agenda items (expand as needed)Edit

• New Inqs — this has been under discussion for some time, and I'd like to vote on the two Inqs mentioned at the last meeting. If either of those are reading this and would like to make a statement of some sort, please email or PM an Inq. Also, if anyone has any other candidates, now is the time.
• Rotting noms — because of their long nature, as well as the fact that they are probably topics most Inqs are quite familiar with, Corran Horn and Wraith Squadron's FANs are receiving little to no Inq attention. How do we fix this? Is it just "tough shit" to the nominator? Ataru has something to say about this, I think.
  • Yes, yes I do. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 21:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
• {{Sofixit}} — I think the creation of some sort of guide as to what is and is not an acceptable objection might be prudent. Perhaps a tutorial type thing? Speaking of which...
• Tutorials — how are these coming along? How have they been received?

AttendanceEdit

Will claim to intend showing up but acknowledges it really is a lotteryEdit

1. The availability of a PC will determine whether or not I am present. As this will be my first meeting (and I do want to attend), I will do the best I can.—Tommy9281 ^{(Peace is a lie)} 02:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
2. I think I can. Chack Jadson ^(Talk) 12:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
3. From my cold, dead hands! Graestan^(Talk) 01:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
4. —Xwing328^(Talk) 00:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
5. Tentatively. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
6. Excellent possibility, barring the sudden development of a social life :) - Cavalier One^{(Squadron channel)} 13:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Want to make it look like they have better things to doEdit

1. Though I'd quite like to be, it doesn't look like I'll be able to make it. I'll do my best. -- AdmirableAckbar ^(Talk) 01:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
2. Helping a buddy move. Gonk ^(Gonk!) 02:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
3. Bah! Something in RL has come up. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 14:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
4. RL issue. Sorry. Master Aban Fiolli ^{{Alpheridies University ComNet}} 19:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments from absentee membersEdit

From the yellow moffship of AdmirableAckbar:

• Isolder — no changes from last time; kill. It doesn't look like an FA.
• Missile Boat — I'm not really sure about this. I'd need more knowledge to make a proper decision. It may be prudent to just revert to the version that was approved as an FA and work from there.
• Ebon Hawk — probation. Doesn't look like an FA.
• Battle of Coruscant — probation.
• Battle of Nar Shadda — easy fixes. Someone poke Ataru and we won't need to probe.
  • You do know that's not one of mine, right? Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 14:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
• New Inqs — I've given Grae my thoughts and votes on this.
• Rotting noms — unless Ataru comes up with a great solution, I'm not sure what can be done. If you want to write massive articles about well-known topics with exhaustive detail, you've got to be prepared for a long wait. I've started reading Wraith Squadron, but, frankly, I'd rather just read the books themselves. So yeah, have patience, or whatever—people will read them, eventually.
• I bring this up because I've seen a few people who review regularly (both Inqs and non-Inqs) make niggly objections without ever having edited the article themselves. This, I think, is a problem; it's fair enough to object about tiny things if you've just fixed lots of stuff yourself, but what I've mentioned is unacceptable, imo. Some sort of a guide is a possible solution.
• I bring this up because I haven't heard much about them, and would like to know what the story is.
  • Apologies for my absence. If I may comment, the FAN page is running reasonably efficiently at the minute, but, as ever, there are too many Inqs doing nothing. I'm quite tired of seeing roughly half the Inq doing all the work while others, most of whom are still active on the site, do nothing or very little. -- AdmirableAckbar ^(Talk) 00:23, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

From the Gonk of Gonk:

• Isolder: kill.
• Missile Boat: disassemble.
• Ebon Hawk: hock.
• Battle of Coruscant (Clone Wars): uhhh... shoot with a goofy missile with little droids inside it? (That means probation.)
• Battle of Nar Shaddaa: per Acky, or probe if nothing happens.
• New Inqs: Abstaining.
• Rotting Noms: Writers of monstrosities must expect Inqs to flee them as villagers from a monstrous, lumbering parody of nature. Learn patience. Also, remember the cardinal rule of good writers: It's not what you add, it's what you remove. If a section of your FA is longer and/or more detailed than the Main Article that section links to, well, we have a problem.
• Sofixit-itis: We cannot require Inqs to make all corrections in every article they review. But the point is that if you can make the correction, why not do it? It saves you AND the nominator time. The worst that can happen is the nominator might protest if you rephrase something in an inelegant or inaccurate way. When in doubt, track the nominator down in IRC and ask. I do it all the time. But anyway, yes, a set of guidelines couldn't hurt.
• Tutorials: I have actually made decent progress on Gonk's Parable of Proofreading and Prose Propriety—however, not enough progress to estimate a date of completion any more specific than mid-to-late August.
• New items I would like you guys to discuss without me, if it isn't too much trouble:

• Something about how we don't get nearly enough non-character articles FANned. Maybe just an informal vote to encourage underrepresented categories like planets and stuff. I dunno.
• Meetings every other month instead of every month: whaddya think sirs? Gonk ^(Gonk!) 02:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

From the desk of Atarumaster88

• Smash all the old articles. Nobody's done the work.
• Probation for Ebon Hawk, Battle of Nar Shaddaa, and that Coruscant one too. NO MERCY!
• New Inqs: I've heard only scattered rumors, but if it's our extra-galactic friend, then I approve if he wants it. Ditto with our arboreal friend. I think Sith friend isn't quite ready yet and I don't think anyone else is ready/up to it. Yes, those are all no votes with two exceptions, and should be counted as such.
• Rotting noms: Yes, I know they're long. I know they take as much time to read as well, half of 4dot's noms put together, for example (:-P). I understand the need to have patience, I really do. I mean, nothing much is going to get passed in a week at the rate we're going. But when something is up for FA for two months and it's received one or two reviews . . . that's just unacceptable to me. TL;DR is not an excuse. Look, we're going to have more long noms. I've kept my ear to the ground, and I know Havac's going to flood the page when he gets back in the fall. WP:NEGTC has Lando coming up. I'm sure the TOTJers will cook up something long in the next few months. GT has Thrawn and Culator's working on Kyle Katarn. These will all be over 100 KB noms. I can almost guarantee Lando will be more than 200 KB. The first question is: Do we want major topics on the Main Page? I tend to think that's a yes. While the Battle of Mt. Corvast is a very nice, quality article, I think that the casual reader visiting the main page will be more impressed on an well-done article on major players in canon and the EU. We should want the long articles to go on the main page, righ? I have nothing against the small ones, mind you. However, when we ignore the big 'uns, it takes away the incentive to write longer articles. As a writer, my thoughts are, why should I write an FA about a large topics when nobody's ever going to approve it? I'm sure, like many other FA writers, that I'm not in it for the glory of having "teh largeset artical on Wookieepedia" but it's frustrating to have a stagnant nom. I'm sure many of you can attest to that. For a fraction of that effort, I could write a dozen more articles on minor topics and get them featured in a fraction of the time. If it's an issue with the nominator, that's all good and well, but we shouldn't use our laziness as an excuse to not pass long articles. It sickens me to see noms from mid-June still on the page in late July . . . and not even the long ones. I wish I had a brilliant solution to this. I've thought about it, but I know the more relentless copyeditors will insist that everything gets as many thorough reviews as possible. Trying to match that demand for spotless quality vs. time doesn't necessarily work out well. I have two suggestions, though. The first is that any Inqs try and skim over the articles shortly after they're nominated-as Graestan has done with Wraith Squadron-and remark on any big things. Those will take the nominator some time to fix anyway. The second suggestion is to break the review up into segments, as Jorrel has done with Corran Horn, and just review a little at a time. Alternately, you could review some of these in IRC moots if there's nothing better to do, but I know that's unrealistic and bound to be unpopular with this group. In reply to Gonk, an FA writer should not be blamed for the lack of coverage on another article. Just because our First Battle of Helska article is 3 KB long doesn't mean that a comprehensive Yuuzhan Vong War article should have a section on the First Battle of Helska less than 3 KB. That's patently ridiculous, if you ask me. The FAN's detail should be judged on how much should be in that article, not how much other articles about the "main topic" are developed. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 14:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
• Sofixit-itis: Haven't noticed a real problem with this that much, to be honest. It's my policy to not leave objections to things like typos; I fix those myself. I oppose any strict policy on it; a loose guideline would be much more amenable, perhaps with a link to WP:BOLD.
• Tutorials: I have started the organization tutorial. I'm flat-out not finishing it until Wraith Squadron is passed.
• On Gonk's items:
  • The non-characters: My stance is No Big Deal. An FA is an FA. Let's not skew things for variety's sake; we want to encourage more FAs of any kind, not just non-character FAs.
  • Meetings: Meetings should be monthly. We have enough stuff to discuss to make it worth it. If they get that boring, you can Inq-review some stuff during the meeting. The Inq needs to meet, or it gets even less active.
• Final comments: I think FAN is running fairly well too. We just have lots of hyperactive writers with no lives. :-P Also, we might should gently ask some of the absentee Inqs to step it up—and not by talk pages. I'll speak to one of my prótegés on the matter, but if they're not active on the site, we can't expect them to Inq. Also, if I come back post-meeting and find that the absentee members' opinions/votes weren't counted—as has happened in some past meetings—Gonk, Ackbar, and I will find some kind of creative punishment for you. As always, have a Super Terrific Friendly Un-frustrating day. Atarumaster88 ^{(Talk page)} 14:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

From the Pasta Bowl of Fiolli:

1. Kill/probe all articles.
2. New Inqs: I gave my instructions to Graestan, and I want my votes counted. :)
3. Rotting Noms: Ummm... Ok. First, long articles are going to be on there longer than shorter ones. Therefore, what might take a more normative nom one month might take a longer one proportionally longer. This is not an excuse or a justification of sheer laziness, just a reality. Second, regarding my personal situation with the articles in question: we can talk individually on IRC if you have a complaint.
4. {{sofixit}}: Per Ataru. I think common sense should be the key.
5. Gonk proposals: Much in favor of non-character FAs.
6. Gonk, Part the Second: Every other month might be too long, but every month is too difficult for me to make on a regular basis. I hate missing these things, but RL is too crazy right now.
7. Lastly, I sign off. Master Aban Fiolli ^{{Alpheridies University ComNet}} 19:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

• Hey guys, I had every intention of coming tonight, but I'm still in the middle of editing a video project for tomorrow morning. Sorry I couldn't make it. —Xwing328^(Talk) 02:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Results and summaryEdit

AttendanceEdit

• Cavalier One
• Chack Jadson
• Darth Culator
• Eyrezer
• Graestan
• Jaina Solo
• Toprawa and Ralltiir
• Tommy9281
• A whole bunch of proxy votes

Notably missing from attendanceEdit

• Lord Hydronium
• Xwing328

Articles reviewedEdit

• Isolder – Removed.
• Missile Boat – Removed.
• Battle of Coruscant (Clone Wars) – Probation.
• Ebon Hawk – Probation.
• Battle of Nar Shaddaa – Probation.
• Battle of Atha Prime – Kept, but needs a P&T section per FAN rules.

Items discussedEdit

• No new Inqs; Harrar looks good for next time if he reviews some between now and then.
• Rotting noms: Not much to say, really; many causes, but the nominators can work to make sure their articles pass. Many Inqs don't have the kind of time to wade through prose for five hours. Those that do end up having other reservations.
• {{Sofixit}}: Common sense doesn't really require a page. If you know how to fix it, and can easily do so, do it!
• Non-character FAs: Not much we can do, aside from moving them up the queue.
• Meetings every two months: Those present had no issue with monthly or near-monthly soirees. The one conflict that arises is that the probation period grows a bit too long.