|
|
| (63 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | '''Feel free to add comments about the latest entries of the Admin Blog here.''' | + | <center><big>'''Feel free to add comments about the latest entries of the Admin Blog here.'''</big><br>Talk Page renewal as of 5th January 2015. All old comments removed.</center> |
| − | ==General Discussion==
| + | |
| − | Do you want us to post from the top or the bottom? --'''Δ [[User:Epelesker|Epelesker]]''' ([[User talk:Epelesker|talk]]) 17:19, 24 September 2013 (MST)
| + | |
| − | :Top should be the newest I think. Easier to see the newest stuff that way. -- [[User:Destructor|Destructor]] ([[User talk:Destructor|talk]]) 19:50, 24 September 2013 (MST)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ==PotM Discussion (8th October 2013)==
| + | |
| − | Yes, I realize I was horrible and didn't really elaborate much on what exactly our positions were in the backroom discussion we had. I'd rather let the mods speak for themselves here, rather than attempt to paint the entire picture on my own.
| + | |
| − | :My personal reason for bringing up the discussion is that I feel that the public vote system, as it is now, has its flaws: from some comments that have appeared in recent months, there have been issues with results ending up skewed toward well-viewed pages owned by active members, and that articles that barely miss winning several months in a row get "pushed". --'''Δ [[User:Epelesker|Epelesker]]''' ([[User talk:Epelesker|talk]]) 17:41, 8 October 2013 (MST)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | About the PotM thing - Mostly the trend I've seen was that all the voted-in folks had Art of some kind. Makes it difficult for some people (I'm including myself in this) to get any kind of recognition for pages they've spent a lot of time on. Just seems like having art done is like, a prerequisite for being voted in.--[[File:ZydrateWikiSig.png|User:Zydrate]] 16:20, 8 October 2013 (MST)
| + | |
| − | :I'm actually happy you brought this up for discussion because it's a point that I pretty much forgot about. I can see where it can be believed that there's an unwritten rule or a "pay to win" mentality where a page ''has'' to have commissioned artwork, but there really isn't such a thing. I can agree with you to a certain extent that pages with artwork (and extensive formatting) have a certain edge with the preference of voters, but it's not like we can disqualify those articles just because of it, or easily sway the public opinion to lean towards simpler articles. --'''Δ [[User:Epelesker|Epelesker]]''' ([[User talk:Epelesker|talk]]) 17:41, 8 October 2013 (MST)
| + | |
