User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-27280472-20160323173732/@comment-1506468-20160803083619: Difference between revisions
(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: | ||
We're an active community on this Wiki, we as a '''community''' created the rules of the wiki, and we have debates as to whether we include certain ranges under our Valid sources, that being the reason why the [[Tardis:Valid sources]] article was written. Just to wait for CzechOut's final say on the matter isn't that of a community, otherwise there's no point in having a forum to debate these things in the first place. | We're an active community on this Wiki, we as a '''community''' created the rules of the wiki, and we have debates as to whether we include certain ranges under our Valid sources, that being the reason why the [[Tardis:Valid sources]] article was written. Just to wait for CzechOut's final say on the matter isn't that of a community, otherwise there's no point in having a forum to debate these things in the first place. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 4: | ||
If, like in the case of Vienna, the range doesn't neatly fall under the Valid sources then I do believe that CzechOut's views are required to help us define our policy, but never once should it be only he that directs our rules. We can't be pestering the poor guy about every change that needs to be made around here! | If, like in the case of Vienna, the range doesn't neatly fall under the Valid sources then I do believe that CzechOut's views are required to help us define our policy, but never once should it be only he that directs our rules. We can't be pestering the poor guy about every change that needs to be made around here! | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20160323173732-27280472/20160803083619-1506468]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:11, 27 April 2023
We're an active community on this Wiki, we as a community created the rules of the wiki, and we have debates as to whether we include certain ranges under our Valid sources, that being the reason why the Tardis:Valid sources article was written. Just to wait for CzechOut's final say on the matter isn't that of a community, otherwise there's no point in having a forum to debate these things in the first place.
If this range does fit within our Tardis:Valid sources, and the general consensus here is that it does, then we should move forward as a community to include it. Fwhiffahder proposed this inclusion months ago, and it just seems to have been swept under the carpet. That's not fair to Fwhiffahder, or the wiki community itself.
If, like in the case of Vienna, the range doesn't neatly fall under the Valid sources then I do believe that CzechOut's views are required to help us define our policy, but never once should it be only he that directs our rules. We can't be pestering the poor guy about every change that needs to be made around here!
