18,063
edits
Talk:Deanna Mustard: Difference between revisions
→Article Is Too Short for FA Status
Son of Suns (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
:::I just took a look at the [[MarioWiki:Featured Articles]] page and I'm not seeing anything that would either support or inhibit the action of removing an FA. The surefire way of doing this is writing up a proposal, passing it, and then taking down Deanna Mustard through whatever new process we're talking about - that way we don't have to worry about anyone getting upset that the article was taken down based on a rule that was added after this article was nominated without discussion. I'm worried because right now a group of sysops cannot make an article an FA without first bringing it public, so why should removing FA status be different? It seems like it should be a public decision. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 20:06, 12 August 2008 (EDT) | :::I just took a look at the [[MarioWiki:Featured Articles]] page and I'm not seeing anything that would either support or inhibit the action of removing an FA. The surefire way of doing this is writing up a proposal, passing it, and then taking down Deanna Mustard through whatever new process we're talking about - that way we don't have to worry about anyone getting upset that the article was taken down based on a rule that was added after this article was nominated without discussion. I'm worried because right now a group of sysops cannot make an article an FA without first bringing it public, so why should removing FA status be different? It seems like it should be a public decision. {{User:Stumpers/sig}} 20:06, 12 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
::::Alright, thanks for your opinion. I think I'm going to make a proposal about this special case, without any consequences on other FAs though. IMO it's best to handle these two issues separately. (By the way, I wasn't suggesting to make this a sysop-only decision – everyone could object my suggestion to remove FA status, but yeah, most "regular" users don't watch talk pages, so a proposal is probably better.) {{User:Time Q/sig}} 07:01, 13 August 2008 (EDT) | ::::Alright, thanks for your opinion. I think I'm going to make a proposal about this special case, without any consequences on other FAs though. IMO it's best to handle these two issues separately. (By the way, I wasn't suggesting to make this a sysop-only decision – everyone could object my suggestion to remove FA status, but yeah, most "regular" users don't watch talk pages, so a proposal is probably better.) {{User:Time Q/sig}} 07:01, 13 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
==Above Interview== | |||
Is the above interview legitimate? Every seemed to just accept it without questioning the credentials of the interview? How was it conducted? When? And how do we know its true? -- {{User|Son of Suns}} | |||