Wookieepedia:Inq/Meeting XXXV

< Wookieepedia:Inq
Wookieepedia > Wookieepedia:Inquisitorius > Inq/Meeting XXXV


Haazenpertylights
Those aren't horns, they're rabbit ears. Seriously.
Inquisition Meeting Times
Americas
UTC-12Saturday 7th 11:00
UTC-11Saturday 7th 12:00
UTC-10 (HST)Saturday 7th 13:00
UTC-9Saturday 7th 14:00
UTC-8 (PST)Saturday 7th 15:00
UTC-7 (MST)Saturday 7th 16:00
UTC-6 (CST)Saturday 7th 17:00
UTC-5 (EST)Saturday 7th 18:00
UTC-4 (AST)Saturday 7th 19:00
UTC-3 (NST)Saturday 7th 20:00
UTC-2Saturday 7th 21:00
Europe and Africa
UTC-1Saturday 7th 22:00
UTC/GMTSaturday 7th 23:00
UTC+1Sunday 8th 0:00
UTC+2Sunday 8th 1:00
Asia and Australasia
UTC+3Sunday 8th 2:00
UTC+4 (MSK)Sunday 8th 3:00
UTC+5Sunday 8th 4:00
UTC+6Sunday 8th 5:00
UTC+7 (NOVST)Sunday 8th 6:00
UTC+8 (AWST)Sunday 8th 7:00
UTC+9 (JST/KST)Sunday 8th 8:00
UTC+10 (AEST)Sunday 8th 9:00
UTC+11Sunday 8th 10:00
UTC+12Sunday 8th 11:00
"A commitment to the mission above the preservation of self–this I understand. This I respect."
―The highly dedicated Grand Moff Tranner

Inquisitorius Meeting XXXV is upon us. The date? Saturday, August 7, 2010. The time? 23:00 UTC, or 7pm EDT for East-Coasters. In honor of XXXV—a truly great number—we must all use Roman numerals on this day!

Agenda

Articles from last time

New articles

  • Ric Olié—needs BTS update. See history
  • Drovian—doesn't follow Layout Guide
  • Platt Okeefe—First name usage. "Repaying the Debt" section needs to be completely rewritten (full of speculation, written in present tense, reads like a Bts). Xicer9Atgar(Combadge) 18:05, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Add to as needed
  1. Continuing a previous discussion: I understand that this is out of our control due to the nature of the new TOR-related projects, but I want to express my concern about a nominations of these articles, for they could change drastically with the release of a series of new products. I trust that they will be kept up-to-date when the barrage of new information becomes available in quick succession. I'm not suggesting that these nominations violate our requirements on stability or that they should not be nominated. I just want it known that these types of articles need to be constantly policed as they are obvious fanon targets and will need updating. I only mention this because any article, such as this one, could change dramatically from when the Inq approves it to the point where it reaches the main page. I want to see it retain FA status, but if it is a completely different article, then we will be forced to reevaluate it at a meeting. I think we should continue to talk about this, as we have in the past, to make sure we are prepared for such situations. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 16:32, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
    • Personal note to Trayus on this matter: I commend you for doing the TOR-related FANs, and I trust you will keep them up to date in a timely manner. Keep up the good work. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 16:32, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
      • As a note, I totally understand any apprehension regarding these articles. I know that it is difficult to assume that they are comprehensive and well-written when that fact could change in a matter of days. I would agree with and support any action you all take in order to ensure the continuing standards of any TOR FAs, and would also support your decision to remove them if they fall below those standards. They do require closer scrutiny because of their nature, so know that myself and the rest of WP:TOR will accommodate your decisions on the matter however possible. And thank you to Fiolli for your kind words. Darth Trayus(Trayus Academy) 21:31, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
  2. I would like to propose a motion to reimplement the "edit section" links on the FA page. As I understand it, the links were originally removed to remind the Inqs to manually change the number of FAs at the top of the page when adding new content. However, with the automatic script doing it for us, I see no reason why the edit section tab can't be reimplemented. As the FA page gets longer, it takes more time to scroll down and search for the appropriate sections; by bringing the edit sections option back, Inqs can simply add the article list to the appropriate subsection with a minimum of fuss. - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 14:03, August 6, 2010 (UTC)

Attendance

Check

  1. Probably. Chack Jadson (Talk) 23:07, July 21, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Probably. Toprawa and Ralltiir 02:10, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Probably. IFYLOFD (Floyd's crib) 02:13, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
  4. A little too soon to tell, given my ever-changing schedule, but I should be able to attend this time. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 14:52, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Wow. Could it be that two consecutive Inqmoots were scheduled on the Saturdays I can actually make? In seriousness, this looks good from afar. I see no reason why I should not be in attendance as of now. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 16:10, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Might be a little tough for me, but I'll try. I'll leave notes if I can't make it. CC7567 (talk) 21:34, August 6, 2010 (UTC)

Negative

  1. Probably not. I'll be traveling that week and I have no idea if I'll have internet access, so I'll just list myself here to be safe. Xicer9Atgar(Combadge) 02:15, July 22, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Not looking good right now. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 15:36, July 24, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Still no home internet unless you count an iPhone. Notes below. - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 14:03, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Not likely. Grunny (talk) 23:24, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
  5. I'll be camping.—Tommy 9281 00:46, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
  6. I plan to be someplace without a computer and with alcohol. Get Nuku-Nuku to flip a coin for every yes/no vote for me. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 04:06, August 7, 2010 (UTC)

Comments

  1. Cav's notes:
    • Kill Shelvay (no work), Jedi Civil War (update still pending, although I would support extended probation if it was offered), Undercity Sewers (no work), Seha Dorvald (no work)
    • Keep Isard, CC-1004, Young-Elders War
    • Probe Olie, Drovian and O'Keefe
    • Support Fiolli's concern over new articles. Suggest that some articles that undergo massive rewriting due to new material may need a "mini-Inq" review to retain status.
    • Also support my own suggestion to reimplement edit sections links on FA page. - Cavalier OneFarStar(Squadron channel) 14:03, August 6, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Tranner's "just in case" notes, because his internet connection has become increasingly unreliable:
    • Kill Shelvay, Jedi Civil War.
    • Keep Isard, CC-1004, Dorvald, Young-Elders War.
    • Extend probation on Undercity Sewers, because Tm_T is working on it.
    • Probe Olié, Drovian, O'Keefe.
    • Support both reevaluation of TOR and similar FAs after major updates, and reimplementation of edit sections on FA page. Grand Moff Tranner Imperial Department of Military Research (Comlink) 00:18, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
  3. Tommy's notes…
    • …Are the same as GMT's.—Tommy 9281 00:46, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
  4. Grunny:
    • Kill: Corwin Shelvay, Jedi Civil War.
    • Keep: Ysanne Isard, CC-1004, Seha Dorvald, Young-Elders War
    • Extend probe: Undercity Sewers
    • Probe: Ric Olié, Drovian, Platt Okeefe
    • Support re-adding section edit links on FA page. Grunny (talk) 00:54, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
  5. Jujiggum:
    • Kill: Jedi Civil War, Corwin Shelvay
    • Keep: Young-Elders War, Ysanne Isard, Seha Dorvald, CC-1004
    • Probe: Ric Olié, Drovian, Plat O'Keefe, and extend probe Undercity sewers
    • Support: re-adding section edit links on the FA page and Fiolli's suggestion of reevaluating FAs with major updates as needed. Jonjedigrandmaster (Talk) 03:54, August 7, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Something just came up and I'll probably be late. So here's Chack's notes:
    • Kill: Jedi Civil War, Corwin Shelvay
    • Keep: Young-Elders War, Ysanne Isard, Seha Dorvald, CC-1004
    • Probe: Ric Olié, Drovian, Plat O'Keefe, Undercity sewers
    • On a similar note, I'm tired of extending probe so frivolously. Just saying.
    • Support: re-adding section edit links on the FA page and Fiolli's suggestion of reevaluating FAs with major updates as needed.
    • Copied from Jon. :P Chack Jadson (Talk) 20:51, August 7, 2010 (UTC)

Minutes

Attendance

Noticeably absent

Articles on probation

FA status kept

FA status removed

Probe extended until next meeting

New articles

Probed

Escaped probation

Items discussed

  • A Review Update page will be created, in similarity to the FAN, to review FAs that undergo major updates with additions of 3,000 bytes or more, or major rewrites (the latter to be judged on a case-by-case basis). Articles to undergo Review Updates will be selected at meetings, and will require 3 votes from current Inquisitors only to retain their status.
  • The "edit section" function will be restored for the FA page.
  • Green tentacle volunteered for post-meeting paperwork.