User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Tales from the Tardis/@comment-188432-20130325173913/@comment-4189499-20130415033633: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Maybe, since the biggest problem here seems to be a matter of policy wording, since the main policy writer can't think of how to phrase things so we could include Vienna but not a whole bunch of other things, maybe the people in this thread who want Vienna to stay in can try their hand at drafting a policy which would work to allow in Vienna but not the others. If they can successfully do it, maybe it would be more likely for that to become policy and for Vienna to be deemed valid on this wiki. If nobody can figure out some good wording, it will have to be concluded that Vienna is invalid. Just an idea. Anyone agree? | Maybe, since the biggest problem here seems to be a matter of policy wording, since the main policy writer can't think of how to phrase things so we could include Vienna but not a whole bunch of other things, maybe the people in this thread who want Vienna to stay in can try their hand at drafting a policy which would work to allow in Vienna but not the others. If they can successfully do it, maybe it would be more likely for that to become policy and for Vienna to be deemed valid on this wiki. If nobody can figure out some good wording, it will have to be concluded that Vienna is invalid. Just an idea. Anyone agree? | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Tales from the Tardis/20130325173913-188432/20130415033633-4189499]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:51, 27 April 2023
Maybe, since the biggest problem here seems to be a matter of policy wording, since the main policy writer can't think of how to phrase things so we could include Vienna but not a whole bunch of other things, maybe the people in this thread who want Vienna to stay in can try their hand at drafting a policy which would work to allow in Vienna but not the others. If they can successfully do it, maybe it would be more likely for that to become policy and for Vienna to be deemed valid on this wiki. If nobody can figure out some good wording, it will have to be concluded that Vienna is invalid. Just an idea. Anyone agree?
