Return to article

Proposal_talk: Proposed membership table

Revision as of 07:19, 15 March 2013 by Anthonyhcole (talk | contribs) (→‎Could someone please add me?: new section)

main space

I would think the presence of a few members on this page indicates that it's not really a proposed table, it's an actual table. Do you need a formal 2nder to move it to mainspace? - I'm tempted to move it across sometime in the next few days if you don't mind? cheers, Privatemusings 14:10, 4 December 2012 (EST)

Your name is missing from the list :P
Please do not move the page to mainspace. We have a proposals process. We need to build a process around this, and think about the edge cases. The committee then reviews and approves content going into mainspace. If you dont like the process, write a proposal in your userspace to fix the process. :P John Vandenberg 15:43, 4 December 2012 (EST)
I wonder if a page really is equal to a proposal? - I suppose that sorta makes sense - but again, I'd be a fan of us trying to dial down the processes a touch on occasion, with the aim of increasing the likelihood of positive edits / changes etc. - just from the top of my head, I'd say anything which could require funding (and certainly anything which is requesting funding) should follow the proposals process, but I'm not sure something like this should really require it.... otoh, now it's got a 2nder from the committee, I guess I can just move it over? :-) Privatemusings 13:07, 5 December 2012 (EST)
Strictly speaking, a committee member needs to 'approve' it, rather than second it. So I guess we need a second committee member now... although, yes, I'm sure there are some types of pages that are allowed to be created on this wiki without them being called 'proposals'... although, perhaps we need a proposal to determine which types these would be?  ;-) Sam Wilson 14:36, 5 December 2012 (EST)
I'm going to assume that Craig has approved it, and obviously there are a bunch of implicit seconders (I'll be explicit if you like, and I'm happy to second it too......) - much as the idea of a gordian proposal process appeals enormously to me, unless someone pipes up with any objection, I reckon it'll be ok if I to move this over to mainspace tomorrow, or when I get around to it :-) Privatemusings 16:53, 5 December 2012 (EST)
Yeah! (I got there first.) Well, when you move it, just remove the word 'proposed' from the title, and it will no longer be a proposal! Or something. "All in the fullness of time, Minister..." ;-) —Sam Wilson 17:26, 5 December 2012 (EST)
According to the policy on proposals, this has to be open for seven days for comment and so that anyone has an opportunity to object (not that I'm expecting that in this case). At that point the committee can vote at its next meeting on whether to accept or decline the proposal. Please don't move this into the mainspace until that happens. Lankiveil 21:22, 6 December 2012 (EST).
Ah, so it should go into Proposal space? - it's a bit of a square peg in a proposal hole really though, no? - I mean, it's not really a proposal is it? Maybe we should take Sam's advice above and create a proposal that not all pages are proposals :-) Privatemusings 09:45, 7 December 2012 (EST)
Durr, I'd assumed it was already there. As two members and a ctte member supported, yes, it would be fine to go into Proposal space. I've done the move. Lankiveil 13:44, 9 December 2012 (EST).

It's voluntary. Of course it's fine. I'd really rather not waste time with proposals for writing in mainspace. Let's have a Bold-Revert-Discuss proposal. --99of9 13:37, 9 December 2012 (EST)

Could someone please add me?

Time rich