CZ Talk:Election July-August 2013/Referenda/6: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>John Stephenson (→Unnecessary: You could have a referendum on that if it rewrote the Charter) |
imported>John R. Brews (To John Stephenson) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
'Approved' articles are hard to modify, and many presently 'approved' articles are sadly deficient. So far as I can see, the notion of an 'approved' article does nothing to enhance CZ, but does result in a poorer quality of article being touted as prime examples of what CZ stands for. This entire conception should be abandoned, not made easier to institute. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 13:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | 'Approved' articles are hard to modify, and many presently 'approved' articles are sadly deficient. So far as I can see, the notion of an 'approved' article does nothing to enhance CZ, but does result in a poorer quality of article being touted as prime examples of what CZ stands for. This entire conception should be abandoned, not made easier to institute. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 13:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
:You could propose your own referendum on that. :) It would have to be a Charter-modifying one, rewriting Articles 15 and 22. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 13:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | :You could propose your own referendum on that. :) It would have to be a Charter-modifying one, rewriting Articles 15 and 22. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 13:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
::Maybe my reluctance to propose charter amendments is a carryover in habits from WP where no change is ever possible. In any event, I view this referendum as making the 'approval' of articles more common, and therefore to be avoided. [[User:John R. Brews|John R. Brews]] 14:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:32, 23 July 2013
Unnecessary
'Approved' articles are hard to modify, and many presently 'approved' articles are sadly deficient. So far as I can see, the notion of an 'approved' article does nothing to enhance CZ, but does result in a poorer quality of article being touted as prime examples of what CZ stands for. This entire conception should be abandoned, not made easier to institute. John R. Brews 13:29, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- You could propose your own referendum on that. :) It would have to be a Charter-modifying one, rewriting Articles 15 and 22. John Stephenson 13:48, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe my reluctance to propose charter amendments is a carryover in habits from WP where no change is ever possible. In any event, I view this referendum as making the 'approval' of articles more common, and therefore to be avoided. John R. Brews 14:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)