Wookieepedia:Inquisitorius/Log/2007 October 20

Session Start: Sat Oct 20 00:00:00 2007 Session Ident: #wookieepedia-inquisitorius ... [18:40] * LordHydronium changes topic to 'FA Nazis: "NO STAR FOR YOU!" | Inq Meeting Twelve, Sat/Sun October 20th/21st, 0:00 UTC | That's 8PM Eastern in the US due to Daylight Savings Time, which will still be in effect | http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Inq/Meeting_Twelve�' ... [20:01] <@Graestan> Meetin' Time [20:01] <@GreenTentacle> I'm off to bed. [20:01] <@GreenTentacle> Enjoy the meeting. :P [20:01] <@Graestan> Goodnight. [20:01] <@LordHydronium> Meeting time. [20:01] <@LordHydronium> One last call for alcohol. [20:01] * @GreenTentacle (n=chatzill@wikia/GreenTentacle) Quit ("ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox 2.0.0.7/2007091417]"�) [20:01] <@Darth_Culator> Wake up call: Gonk|Away Graestan Grey-man Havac JainaSolo LordHydronium The4dotelipsis [20:01] * @Graestan is alweddy wasteded [20:01] <@Grey-man> Indeed [20:01] <@The4dotelipsis> Oh, yay. [20:02] <@The4dotelipsis> OJ. [20:02] <@The4dotelipsis> Do we recite the incantations now? [20:02] <@Havac> Simpson? [20:02] <@Graestan> guilty [20:02] <@Graestan> sorry, knee-jerk reflex [20:02] <@Graestan> ;) [20:02] <@LordHydronium> Cthulhu fhtagn! [20:02] <@LordHydronium> That's the right incantation, right? [20:03] <@Grey-man> Sure [20:03] <@The4dotelipsis> I thought it was "Smite the proletariat", but OK. [20:03] <@LordHydronium> ...so, who's in charge of this cavalcade of sheep? [20:03] <@Grey-man> I will be [20:03] <@The4dotelipsis> Nuku-Nuku. [20:03] <@Graestan> Yes. My boss is *the* boss. [20:03] <@Grey-man> first order of buisness: Review Gantu and vote [20:03] <@LordHydronium> Who's the shepherd of this herd of sharks? [20:03] <@Grey-man> *business [20:04] <@Graestan> Gantu is overfluffed nothing.  The article is longer than the source, I'll warrant. [20:04] <@Graestan> I gave it a shot, but I think it's not FA material. [20:04] <@Graestan> Any other thoughts? [20:04] <@LordHydronium> I...haven't read it. [20:05] <@Havac> I'm looking at it right now, and it's miniscule. [20:05] <@LordHydronium> Imp and GT both say remove. [20:05] <@Grey-man> I say Remove it's nom [20:05] <@Graestan> I second the Remove [20:05] <@Havac> Remove. [20:05] <@Grey-man> Plus two proxy votes, that's 5 [20:05] <@JainaSolo> Remove [20:05] <@Grey-man> 6 [20:06] <@Darth_Culator> I want it to be an FA, I really do. But it's as fluffed as the worst 4dotism, and not as good. [20:06] <@The4dotelipsis> I think it can be brought to a suitable level of quality. [20:06] <@Grey-man> With a complete rewrite, maybe [20:06] <@Havac> Fourdot, you'd say that about Wehda Jochi. [20:06] <@Graestan> It should be shrunken and GAed if anything. [20:06] <@Grey-man> anyways, nothing is stopping it from being renominated when it's ready [20:06] <@The4dotelipsis> Yah, I don't quite believe in this elitism that is getting bandied about. [20:06] <@Havac> Is it even 1000 words? [20:06] <@Havac> And if so, how? [20:06] <@The4dotelipsis> But if you feel the need to remove it, go ahead. [20:07] <@Grey-man> Alright, so consensus is to remove Gantu's nom [20:07] <@Graestan> Re-read my first comment regarding it. And I really did give it a shot. [20:07] <@Havac> Fourdot, it has nothing to do with elitism and everything to do with the fact that there's *not enough material*. [20:07] <@The4dotelipsis> There actually is, without fluff. [20:08] <@Grey-man> Alright, next order of business: Discuss a New Inq Nominee review system. [20:08] <@The4dotelipsis> But, I digress. [20:08] <@Grey-man> http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Wookieepedia:Inq/Meeting_Twelve&t=20071020231707#Agenda [20:08] <@Darth_Culator> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Wookieepedia:Inq/Meeting_Twelve#Agenda [20:08] <@Graestan> My concern is that someone will look great at one meeting, then throw us all for a loop. [20:08] <@Darth_Culator> Stop with the untrimmed links. [20:08] <@Grey-man> meh [20:08] <@Grey-man> and it was one time [20:09] <@Havac> I say that's more formal than we need. [20:09] <@Graestan> I figured maybe someone could be suggested at one meeting and then seriously nominated at the next. [20:09] <@Havac> Have some people in mind, share them, have them in the general consciousness. [20:09] <@Grey-man> yup [20:09] <@Havac> Then, when you think they're ready, nominate them, and let everyone decide. [20:09] <@LordHydronium> Eh...are people really going to go a 180 on whatever it is that we're concerned about? [20:09] <@Havac> Then, even if they don't go through, they remain on the communal mind. [20:10] <@LordHydronium> I wasn't in the previous discussions, so I don't know if there's any specific thing that brought this about. [20:10] <@Graestan> The main reason is that I figured all current Inqs who haven't noticed the nominees yet would get a look. [20:10] <@LordHydronium> Now that's a good point. [20:10] <@Grey-man> Per Havac...if anything serious does come up, we just tell them to F*ck off [20:10] <@Grey-man> Yes, Grae has a good point [20:10] <@The4dotelipsis> Exactly. [20:10] <@The4dotelipsis> The Fuck Off attitude is what the Inquisitorius was built upon, goddamnit! [20:11] <@Havac> I think we should all just share people we think we should keep an eye on in meetings. . . possibly off the record. . . but not a trial-proposal a month before as a formal requirement. [20:11] <@Graestan> A lot of us have more exposure to either Hobbes or Acky and not both, for instance. [20:11] <@Grey-man> meh, moot point....it's all based off of their activeness on the FAN page [20:11] <@Graestan> per Havac, as long as it's no shoo-ins and more looking [20:11] <@Grey-man> ya [20:11] <@Darth_Culator> So others are considering Ackbar. Good. [20:12] <@Graestan> I felt like a shoo-in, so I worried about future, more regrettable shoo-ins. [20:12] <@The4dotelipsis> I will constantly assert that he have a shitload more to gain by making Hobbes an Inq than we have to lose. [20:12] <@Havac> And I will still say no. [20:12] <@Darth_Culator> Ackbar has made me give serious thought to starting a CT for amending or repealing the age requirements for adminship. [20:12] <@Graestan> Hobbes needs his experience. He makes tons of little bitty objections, yet has not written a decent article yet. [20:12] <@The4dotelipsis> Why? Because he's not going to make the same objections as everyone else? [20:12] <@Havac> No, don't do that. [20:13] <@Grey-man> no, we don't need 14 age old admins [20:13] <@Havac> He can wait his turn. [20:13] <@Graestan> Argue about this on the other channel. [20:13] <@Grey-man> but we, again, digress [20:13] <@LordHydronium> Article writing shouldn't be required for Inqing. [20:13] <@Havac> No, it shouldn't. [20:13] <@Grey-man> So are we in consensus that the Inq hiring system is currently working just fine? [20:14] <@Darth_Culator> I'm just saying, there's *no* age requirement for the Inquistorius, and that's a good thing. [20:14] <@Havac> Pretty much. Let's move on. [20:14] <@Grey-man> Next topic: Quote Requirement. [20:14] <@Graestan> For the most part. [20:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Fire it. [20:14] <@LordHydronium> No quote requirement. [20:14] <@Grey-man> Keep it [20:14] <@Graestan> Require quotes. [20:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Quotes are a huge POV magnet, anyway. [20:14] <@Darth_Culator> Yes quote requirement. [20:14] <@Havac> Keep it if a quote exists. [20:14] <@LordHydronium> There are many articles that can't have a quote. [20:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Why? [20:14] <@LordHydronium> Yes, per Havac. [20:14] <@The4dotelipsis> What if it doesnt' have a quote? [20:14] <@Graestan> Make provisions? [20:14] <@Havac> Then don't force it to have one. [20:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Exactly. [20:15] <@Havac> Just relax the wording, but don't ditch it entirely. [20:15] <@The4dotelipsis> Because then I have to pull shit like the UT-AT quote. [20:15] <@Grey-man> Per Havac [20:15] <@The4dotelipsis> Actually, I don't even see why we should have quotes. [20:15] <@Graestan> But killing the requirement entirely would invite laziness on articles with decent quotes. [20:15] <@Darth_Culator> "A leading quote will be required if there is quotable dialogue by or about the subject." [20:15] <@Havac> Remove the no-FA-without-a-quote loophole, but keep the rule. [20:15] <@The4dotelipsis> They're nice, but I don't see why they should be a requirement. [20:15] <@Graestan> per Havac [20:15] <@Grey-man> Yes, good wording on Culator's part [20:15] <@JainaSolo> Per 4Dot [20:16] <@The4dotelipsis> They're unencyclopedic to boot. [20:16] <@Havac> Support Culator's amendment. [20:16] <@The4dotelipsis> "Here is a place I can get away with rampant POV." [20:16] <@Graestan> Support Culator [20:16] <@Havac> 2 [20:16] <@The4dotelipsis> Support. [20:16] <@Grey-man> Support [20:16] <@LordHydronium> Yah. [20:16] <@Havac> 3 [20:16] <@Havac> 4 [20:16] <@Havac> 5 [20:16] <@JainaSolo> Support [20:16] <@Havac> 6 [20:17] <@Graestan> Are we supporting rampant POV? :P [20:17] <@Darth_Culator> Rampant sex? [20:17] <@The4dotelipsis> Looks like it. [20:17] <@Grey-man> Ok, so that passes, if I'm not mistaken [20:17] <@Havac> Yeah. [20:17] <@Havac> Next. [20:17] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Selective Inqing. [20:17] <@Graestan> POV in quotes can be pointed out as objections within the current rules. [20:18] <@Grey-man> Selective Inq'ing is, from since I've been an Inq, the system. If I remember correctly, it was decided at the meeting where I became an Inq that Inq's were only required to read articles that they wanted to, or had time to. I for one don't have massive amounts of time available to be as active on the site as I was during some of the summer monthsâ€”as a result, I'll read, and throughly... [20:18] <@Grey-man> ...object to if necessary, FAN's that I see lagging in Inq votes. The time that I do have, I spend working on personal projects, and any extra time I read and vote on FAN's and GAN's. I feel that current system is working just fine, and that if someone feels that an FAN is in need of more Inq review, then that's what IRC/talk pages/the Inq IRC channel is for. Most Inqs, when asked, will... [20:18] <@Grey-man> ...review any FAN when they have the time. [20:18] <@Grey-man> That's what I wrote on the meeting page [20:18] <@Havac> We already had this out earlier. [20:18] <@Graestan> Per Selective Inqing, I feel that more Inqs is the only solution if no resolution can be attained. [20:18] <@The4dotelipsis> Yah. [20:18] <@The4dotelipsis> I'd like to elaborate on it, though. [20:19] <@The4dotelipsis> If you're only using your Inq vote to further your own noms, for whatever reason, that's fine, but for each self nom, I'd like to see at least two other articles assessed. [20:19] <@The4dotelipsis> Or something roughly along those lines. [20:19] <@Grey-man> Ya, and we decided on an honor system, IIRC [20:19] <@Graestan> I'm per 4Dot on this, it's a little morefair. [20:19] <@The4dotelipsis> Not a set number, but a balance. [20:20] <@Havac> Honor system, balance, fine. [20:20] <@LordHydronium> Sure. [20:20] <@Grey-man> yup [20:20] <@The4dotelipsis> If it persists, though, we start to get serious, and we go into... [20:20] <@The4dotelipsis> More Talks. [20:20] <@Havac> OK, UN. [20:20] <@Graestan> But it's us, not the community, so Talking isn't so bad. [20:21] <@Grey-man> Everyone fine with that resolution? [20:21] <@Graestan> Yes. [20:21] <@LordHydronium> Works for me. [20:21] <@Grey-man> Culator, JainaSolo? [20:21] <@Darth_Culator> Meh. [20:21] <@JainaSolo> Yup [20:21] <@Grey-man> ok [20:21] <@Havac> Mehriffic. Next! [20:21] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Reviewing articles before they go up on the main page. [20:21] <@Graestan> I think this directly ties into the Queue problem. [20:21] <@The4dotelipsis> Yes, we really need this. [20:22] <@LordHydronium> With the queue we have now, definitely. [20:22] <@Graestan> The review and/or fixing of said articles will be much easier if it's not *two freakin' years* between nom and Main Page. [20:22] <@The4dotelipsis> The idea is this: A week before articles go up on the main page, we review it, and if it's not up to scratch, we dial it back, and probationalise it. [20:22] <@Havac> Yes. Any excuse to kill crappy queued articles. [20:22] <@The4dotelipsis> If it comes about again, without improvement: Kill. [20:22] <@The4dotelipsis> That way, we never feature sub-par work. [20:22] <@Havac> Works for me. [20:23] <@The4dotelipsis> Now, with that... [20:23] <@Havac> The question then becomes what its official status is. [20:23] <@Graestan> The Queue issue should be solved, too, or this will be tons more work than it has to be. [20:23] <@Grey-man> ya [20:23] <@LordHydronium> Wait, probation is 2 weeks standard. [20:23] <@The4dotelipsis> When we dial it back, we swap it with an article that *is* up to scratch. [20:23] <@The4dotelipsis> Yes. [20:23] <@The4dotelipsis> So we dial it back 2 weeks minimum. [20:23] <@LordHydronium> Ah, I see. [20:24] <@Graestan> not a bad idea, then [20:24] <@The4dotelipsis> Until we find a suitable article to replace it with. [20:24] <@LordHydronium> That saves a lot of painful requeuing, at least. [20:24] <@Havac> What happens if it dies before it makes the main page? [20:24] <@The4dotelipsis> Well... [20:24] <@Havac> Do we call it a former FA despite never being featured? [20:24] <@The4dotelipsis> It dies. [20:24] <@LordHydronium> We do the painful requeuing. :P [20:24] <@The4dotelipsis> Yep. [20:24] <@Havac> Can it ever go back on the main page? [20:24] <@The4dotelipsis> If it gets renominated, yeah. [20:25] <@Grey-man> Yes, if it was never on the main page...and after it passes muster again [20:25] <@LordHydronium> Our current rule just says it can't go on the main page if it's already been. [20:25] <@LordHydronium> So that still works. [20:25] <@The4dotelipsis> "Featured", to me, doesn't mean "Main page". [20:25] <@Havac> Then we'll need a separate category for them. [20:25] <@The4dotelipsis> It means on the "FA page". [20:25] <@LordHydronium> Havac: How about just keep track of it? [20:25] <@LordHydronium> Or have a template on the talk page? [20:25] <@The4dotelipsis> Yeah, it shouldn't be too hard. [20:25] <@LordHydronium> Rather than [20:26] <@The4dotelipsis> "This article was due to be featured on XXX. But SOMEONE was a lazy ass." [20:26] <@Graestan> I like 4Dot's proposal, provided something is done about the queue issue, and soon. [20:26] <@Havac> A talkpage template would solve it. [20:26] <@LordHydronium> Grae: That's the 2009 vote. [20:26] <@The4dotelipsis> Ozzel's proposal will fix the queue issue. [20:26] <@Havac> I still hate that vote. [20:26] <@Graestan> Possibly. [20:26] <@Graestan> I ahve my doubts. [20:26] <@Graestan> Who knows who will be here in 2009? [20:26] <@LordHydronium> Well, people seem afraid of cutting queue time any time soon. [20:27] <@The4dotelipsis> Well, we're not going to push 2010 as quickly, that's for sure. [20:27] <@Havac> For one thing, it won't solve the problem for another year, and for another thing, one-a-day still sucks. [20:27] <@Grey-man> So, we're in consensus about reviewing articles, or having someone look over the, 2 weeks before they hit the main page? [20:27] <@Graestan> Yes. [20:27] <@LordHydronium> Wikipedia does one a day just fine. [20:27] <@Havac> We're not nearly that large. [20:27] <@Darth_Culator> Wikipedia has 2,056,657 articles. [20:27] <@Graestan> My idea will hit CT after Ozzel's runs out, regardless of result. [20:27] <@LordHydronium> Havac: Yes, but that didn't sound like your concern. [20:28] <@Grey-man> ok, next topic then? [20:28] <@Havac> It is, partially. [20:28] <@Graestan> Yes. [20:28] <@LordHydronium> Not that we can't keep it up, which Ozzel's proposal handles, but that it's just not good in general. [20:28] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Review Death Star. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Death_Star [20:28] <@Havac> It's not the entirely to my concern. [20:28] <@LordHydronium> Kill it kill it kill it kill it kill it kill it kill it kill it kill it kill it. [20:28] <@Graestan> abstain on Death Star [20:28] <@Grey-man> It doesn't even have a damn infobox [20:28] <@Grey-man> kill it [20:28] <@LordHydronium> It didn't even have Death Star Technical Companion in the sources. [20:28] <@LordHydronium> Until a few weeks ago. [20:29] <@LordHydronium> It still doesn't have Death Star. [20:29] <@Grey-man> bah [20:29] <@LordHydronium> No info from Star Tours. [20:29] <@Darth_Culator> The eponymous novel isn't covered. [20:29] <@Darth_Culator> Kill it. [20:29] <@Grey-man> 3 [20:29] <@LordHydronium> Criminally low info for something with a whole RPG book on it. [20:29] <@Havac> Shit. Kill. [20:29] <@JainaSolo> Kill it [20:29] <@Grey-man> 5 [20:29] <@Grey-man> 4dot? [20:30] <@LordHydronium> Imp and GT both say kill. [20:30] <@Grey-man> 7 [20:30] <@Grey-man> we're good...Death Star killed [20:30] <@Graestan> Bah, Kill it. It looks ugly. [20:30] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Review articles that were placed on probation [20:30] <@Grey-man> First one: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Ephant_Mon [20:30] <@Darth_Culator> Ephant Mon: http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Ephant_Mon&diff=1619737&oldid=1571523 [20:31] <@Graestan> That's not a lot of work, by far. Was it enough? [20:31] <@Havac> It has an *equipment* section. Kill. [20:31] <@Darth_Culator> Infobox got reffed, and the Hunter's Fate strip has no Mon info. I say keep. [20:31] * Imperialles (n=Imp@wikia/Imperialles) has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius [20:31] * Nuku-Nuku sets mode: +o Imperialles [20:31] <@Graestan> Marnin' Imp [20:31] <@Imperialles> Morning. [20:32] <@Grey-man> Havac > Curiosity on my part, what's wrong with the equipment section? [20:32] <@Grey-man> Just so I know where you're coming from [20:32] <@The4dotelipsis> Inconsistency. [20:33] <@Havac> He's not Boba Fett. He's an elephant. It's like having an Equipment section for Palpatine. "He wore robes, and a belt, and carried a cane." [20:33] <@Imperialles> Is the meeting over, or what? [20:33] <@Graestan> Heck, I put that kind of stuff in P&A. [20:33] <@The4dotelipsis> Yeah. [20:33] <@Grey-man> Imp > No, we're reviewing FA's on probation atm [20:33] <@Darth_Culator> Oh, big deal. If we have to have a rule, I'd rather include it than exclude it. [20:33] <@Graestan> I wouldn't kill over that, though. [20:33] <@LordHydronium> From the sound of AA's comments, kep. [20:33] <@Imperialles> Ephant Mon? I'll repeat my vote to kill. [20:33] <@LordHydronium> If there's no unique FF or Hunter's Fate info, that is. [20:33] <@Darth_Culator> And that *wasn't* on the to-do list. [20:34] <@LordHydronium> *keep [20:34] <@Grey-man> There is no new FF info, I double checked [20:34] <@Grey-man> Keep [20:34] <@Graestan> Keep [20:34] <@Darth_Culator> And I read A Hunter's Fate on my own, just to be sure. Mon doesn't talk and isn't talked about. [20:34] <@Havac> Kill. [20:34] <@Imperialles> Dreadful BTS... [20:34] <@Imperialles> Too many pictures... [20:34] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:34] <@Havac> How many keep votes does it need to stay? [20:34] <@Imperialles> Two. [20:34] <@LordHydronium> And there's four. [20:34] <@Havac> Then it stays. [20:34] <@Havac> Next. [20:35] <@Grey-man> Selkath: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Selkath [20:35] <@Grey-man> Kill it [20:35] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:35] <@Darth_Culator> http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Selkath&diff=1614984&oldid=1571456 [20:35] <@Darth_Culator> No progress. It dies. [20:35] <@LordHydronium> Nada? Kill. [20:35] <@Havac> Kill. [20:35] <@Graestan> Kill [20:35] <@Havac> Killed. Next. [20:35] <@Grey-man> Manaan : http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Manaan [20:36] <@Graestan> No fair! You banned Shaelas, so he can't fix it! [20:36] <@Graestan> :P [20:36] <@Darth_Culator> Boo hoo. [20:36] <@Grey-man> No work done since it was put on probation [20:36] <@Grey-man> kill it [20:36] <@Darth_Culator> He shouldn't have been so determined to post fanon. [20:36] <@Havac> Kill it. [20:36] <@Graestan> Just crack its core with a small superlaser. [20:36] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:36] <@JainaSolo> Remove [20:36] <@LordHydronium> Hey GM, can you post the difference links too? Or just them? [20:36] <@LordHydronium> But if nothing's been done here, then kill. [20:36] <@Grey-man> Ya, there is no difference [20:36] <@Grey-man> the last edit was Ataru putting it on Probo [20:37] <@LordHydronium> OK. [20:37] <@Darth_Culator> What does a superlaser do to a water planet? [20:37] <@Grey-man> so that's 4 [20:37] <@Darth_Culator> Kill it. [20:37] <@Grey-man> 5 [20:37] <@Darth_Culator> BOIL it. [20:37] <@LordHydronium> GT has no vote. [20:38] <@Grey-man> Imp? JainaSolo? [20:38] <@LordHydronium> Imp and Jaina voted. [20:38] <@Imperialles>  Kill. [20:38] <@Grey-man> ah [20:38] <@LordHydronium> The4dotelipsis? [20:38] <@Grey-man> my mistake [20:38] <@The4dotelipsis> Sorry? [20:38] <@The4dotelipsis> What's this? [20:38] <@Grey-man> Manaan [20:38] <@The4dotelipsis> Manaan? [20:38] <@LordHydronium> Manaan Manaan. [20:38] <@The4dotelipsis> Fire. [20:38] <@LordHydronium> Doo doo doo doo doo. [20:38] <@Grey-man> Manaan = Killed [20:38] <@Darth_Culator> Beep beep be-deep beep. [20:38] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Vuffi Raa: http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Vuffi_Raa&diff=1592462&oldid=1571504 [20:39] <@Graestan> Lots of work. [20:39] <@Graestan> Bah! [20:39] <@Grey-man> There has been substantial work done by some users since it was put on probation [20:39] <@Graestan> Infobox not sourced. [20:39] <@Grey-man> bah [20:39] <@Graestan> Keep on probation? [20:39] <@Imperialles> Substantial yet not sufficient. [20:39] <@Graestan> Scream at users? [20:39] <@Darth_Culator> For another month? No. [20:39] <@Grey-man> Imp > Ya [20:40] <@The4dotelipsis> I say keep. [20:40] <@Imperialles> The issue is not whether work has been done... [20:40] <@Grey-man> I know that [20:40] <@Darth_Culator> I don't really see what was so bad in the first place. [20:40] <@Imperialles> But rather whether it complies with the FA requirements. [20:40] <@Graestan> Kill. ;( Good-bye, my friend. [20:40] <@Grey-man> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Inq:Vuffi_Raa [20:40] <@Graestan> Nine hundred pictures of the same basic shot gets old, too. [20:41] <@Grey-man> It's not fully sourced per it's probation requirements: Kill it. [20:41] <@LordHydronium> Would anyone be willing to source the Infobox after the meeting? Because it would be a shame to kill over that. [20:41] <@Havac> Kill poor Vuffi. [20:41] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:41] <@Darth_Culator> I'm going to have to be the dissenting voice on this one. [20:41] <@Havac> It can always be restored later. [20:41] <@Imperialles> Rule 16 violation! [20:41] <@Darth_Culator> Along with 4dot. [20:41] <@Darth_Culator> Keep. [20:41] <@Imperialles> Ugh... [20:41] <@Graestan> Imp? [20:41] <@Imperialles> Yes? [20:42] <@Havac> A decent article can always be restored. [20:42] <@Havac> A crap one kept will remain crap. [20:42] <@Imperialles> Per Havac. [20:42] <@Darth_Culator> The BTS was expanded, and I'll source the damn infobox. [20:42] <@Grey-man> Graestan > Rule 16 is about pictures [20:42] <@Graestan> I know. [20:42] <@LordHydronium> Well, if the infobox will be sourced, then keep. [20:42] <@Graestan> I was just wondering the specifics, or if I missed something. [20:42] <@Imperialles> Why keep a mediocre article as a FA, when we can have it re-featured in excellent shape later on? [20:42] <@Grey-man> basically, there is a large number of pictures that are the exact same and don't illustrate anything different [20:42] <@Graestan> per Imp [20:42] <@Grey-man> yes [20:43] <@LordHydronium> We moving on or what? [20:43] <@The4dotelipsis> Is that three keeps? [20:44] <@LordHydronium> Yeah. [20:44] <@Havac> Yeah, it's been voted to keep. [20:44] <@Havac> Sadly. [20:44] <@Havac> Next! [20:44] <@Grey-man> bah [20:44] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Mrs. Leia Solo [20:44] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:44] <@Darth_Culator> http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Leia_Organa_Solo&diff=1620949&oldid=1571459 [20:44] <@Graestan> Move to place on probation again out of the question? [20:44] <@Grey-man> Kill it [20:44] <@The4dotelipsis> Destroy. [20:44] <@Darth_Culator> Kill it. Nowhere NEAR extensive enough. [20:44] <@Graestan> Kill Leia. Just leave her kids out of it. [20:44] <@Havac> Torture. [20:44] <@Darth_Culator> This one will be a project like Luke. [20:44] <@Havac> Then kill. [20:44] <@The4dotelipsis> I see no Missions stuff. [20:45] <@LordHydronium> Killity kill. [20:45] <@Grey-man> Per Culator [20:45] <@Grey-man> alright, Leia is dead [20:45] <@LordHydronium> No expansion done. [20:45] <@Havac> Murderated. Next. [20:45] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Kenobi [20:45] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:45] <@Havac> Kill. [20:45] <@Darth_Culator> http://starwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=Obi-Wan_Kenobi&diff=1621204&oldid=1571467 [20:45] <@Grey-man> Still is not fully sourced...Kill [20:46] <@Darth_Culator> Also kill. [20:46] <@Grey-man> 4 [20:46] <@Graestan> Overly cluttered with images. [20:46] <@Havac> Kill. I'll re-FA it eventually anyway. [20:46] <@Graestan> Kill. [20:46] <@Darth_Culator> In the words of Peter Griffin, "Come on!" [20:46] <@Grey-man> Next Topic: Ulic Qel-Droma http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Ulic_Qel-Droma [20:46] <@Imperialles> Kill. [20:46] <@Grey-man> Kill it for the reasons I stated on the Inq page [20:46] <@Imperialles> Let Greyman rewrite. [20:46] <@Graestan> Grey-man, I think this one needs your touch. [20:46] <@The4dotelipsis> Master Kenobi, you dissapoint me. Kill. [20:46] <@Graestan> In fact, I command you. [20:46] <@Grey-man> I can make this into an excellent article [20:47] <@Darth_Culator> DO IT [20:47] <@Imperialles> It's a kind of magic. [20:47] <@Havac> Remove, then let Grey re-FA. [20:47] <@The4dotelipsis> Quote in prose. [20:47] <@Graestan> I look forward to copyediting it. ;) [20:47] <@The4dotelipsis> Destroy. [20:47] <@Grey-man> Alright, Ulic is dead [20:47] <@The4dotelipsis> And that's not a hologram. [20:47] <@The4dotelipsis> It' [20:47] <@The4dotelipsis> 's a spirit. [20:47] <@Havac> It's a holo. [20:47] <@Havac> Scan lines. [20:47] <@Grey-man> ya, horrible [20:47] <@The4dotelipsis> That talks with Anakin? [20:48] <@Graestan> And man, he's ugly in the infobox. [20:48] <@LordHydronium> Does it have the Sedriss info yet? [20:48] <@Grey-man> JMAS picture [20:48] <@The4dotelipsis> Actually has a conversation with him? [20:48] <@Havac> There were Sith spirits in the cave. [20:48] <@Havac> Without scan lines. [20:48] <@Havac> It's a holo. [20:48] <@The4dotelipsis> That has a conversation with him. [20:48] <@Havac> Holocrons can have conversations, and they're not spirits. [20:48] <@Grey-man> Alright, so I think that's it for the Inq stuff [20:48] <@LordHydronium> Ah, it does. [20:48] <@Graestan> 4Dot> Play KotOR 1 and talk to the holo on Kashyyyk. [20:48] <@Graestan> Same deal. [20:49] <@The4dotelipsis> This is a game that uses the "saber power down" sound for sabers powering up. [20:49] <@The4dotelipsis> I doubt they can get anything right. [20:49] <@LordHydronium> Wow, that infobox picture is even more hideous than it was before. [20:49] <@Havac> Canon is canon, Fourdot. AI can hold a conversation. [20:49] <@Graestan> Yeah; he's quite a brute. [20:49] <@LordHydronium> Now in addition to a crap illustration, it's got an awful background removal job. [20:49] <@Grey-man> yup [20:49] <@Graestan> With strangely luscious lips. [20:50] <@Grey-man> http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Image:Ulic_Qel-Droma.JPG [20:50] <@Graestan> INdeed; looks like an old movie cutout. [20:50] <@LordHydronium> 4dot: I thought that we as a fandom were way past the "there's this thing wrong in a source, therefore we can't trust anything". [20:50] <@Darth_Culator> We can still bitch about it. [20:51] <@Graestan> Wow. No more Inq meeting. [20:51] <@Graestan> Unless... [20:51] <@LordHydronium> People hate backgrounds and speech. [20:51] <@Graestan> Anyone else has anything? [20:51] <@LordHydronium> It's weird. [20:51] <@LordHydronium> I've never had a problem with either, personally. [20:51] <@LordHydronium> But apparently mute people floating in a void of blank color is the rage. [20:52] <@Grey-man> apparently [20:52] <@Graestan> Grey-man, I could've used your input in the debate Hydro is using necromancy on. [20:52] <@Graestan> You like blanking. [20:52] <@Graestan> I like it. [20:52] <@Grey-man> Yes [20:52] <@Graestan> Not background* [20:52] <@Graestan> Just text. [20:52] <@LordHydronium> That's not necromancy. It's just related to the whole background thing. [20:52] <@Graestan> Ah. [20:52] <@The4dotelipsis> Oh, I'd like to discuss Hobbes in a bit more detail, if that's OK. [20:52] <@LordHydronium> Unnecessary editing. [20:52] <@Imperialles> Ackbar. [20:52] <@Havac> Go ahead. [20:52] <@The4dotelipsis> If I can present my case without getting interrupted. [20:52] <@LordHydronium> Yeah, shoot. [20:53] <@Graestan> Go ahead. [20:53] <@The4dotelipsis> OK, well, since I've come back from my hopeless sabbatical, I've noticed him to be one of the most active people on the FAN page. Not nominating, of course, but critiquing others work. [20:54] <@The4dotelipsis> And, by and large, his objections make sense, he's able to pick up on stuff that others don't notice, and he's even willing to help with minor problems himself. [20:54] <@The4dotelipsis> He's displayed initiative, and he has demonstrated that he doesn't get petty. [20:54] <@The4dotelipsis> Now, I know he's quite young, and most of us wouldn't think of doing this at that age. [20:54] <@The4dotelipsis> I also realise that he is yet to actually go through the FAN process as a nominator. [20:55] <@The4dotelipsis> However, the most important thing is that he's picking up on stuff, and noticing stuff, that no one else sees. I think that by having him as an Inquisitor, we can cover a broader range of problems with articles. [20:55] <@The4dotelipsis> And, of course, he's active to boot. [20:56] <@The4dotelipsis> He's working on the Ferus article, which was a nightmare before, and It'll be interesting to see what he comes up with. [20:56] <@The4dotelipsis> And while I think that having done an FAN is helpful when you are looking at someone else's work, I think a different viewpoint can only be good. [20:56] <@The4dotelipsis> If he does do something wrong, we can pick up the slack easily, and tell him "XXX". [20:56] <@The4dotelipsis> That's it. [20:57] <@LordHydronium> I'm curious as to what the objections are to him. He seems like a good reviewer to me. [20:57] <@Graestan> Hobbes is getting ahead of himself with the reviews/objections. I don't think he fully grasps the concepts involved in writing FAs, indeed I believe he may be parroting us. My argument for asking him to write and nom a GA or FA is that then I'd know that he understands the process and the work involved. Age is not an issue for me; I find it a useless prejudice, as he's exceptional. He's... [20:57] <@Graestan> ...also said he doesn't particularly want it. [20:57] <@Graestan> But he may be being modest on that last. [20:57] <@LordHydronium> Well, the last part would be an important point. :P [20:57] <@Havac> What it fundamentally comes down to is that I don't yet trust his judgment. [20:57] <@The4dotelipsis> Yes, that's what I thought. [20:58] <@Graestan> However, your point about his diligence is heard, and I say let him in, if he wants it; we can always keep an eye on the guy. [20:59] <@The4dotelipsis> Basically, for me, it comes down to the fact that we potentially have a lot to gain from having him as an Inq, and not a lot to lose. [20:59] <@Graestan> True. [21:00] <@Graestan> He's been active tonight, I might note. Perhaps he'll come on IRC at some point. [21:00] <@Havac> I don't know. I just don't think he has enough experience. He's objecting to fairly mundane turns of phrase. . . which says to me he just doesn't have the writing knowledge he needs. [21:01] <@The4dotelipsis> Well, I think in those cases, it might be good to...well, talk about those particular turns of phrase with him. [21:01] <@Graestan> I will point out that not every Inq is a perfect writer; that's why we work together with others. [21:01] <@Havac> Fourdot: we do. I know I explain. [21:02] <@Havac> But the point is that he's showing inexperience and lack of knowledge. He should have expertise. [21:02] <@Grey-man> Same thing with AdmirableAckbar....he does write FAN's, there's no question about that....but the amount of things that slip by in his writing makes me question his ability to review an article and object to it with purpose. [21:02] <@The4dotelipsis> Hmm, well, I wouldn't consider myself to be an expert myself. [21:02] <@The4dotelipsis> And I can get questionable and ill-informed objections from the most mature and experienced of users. [21:02] <@Havac> Per Grey. [21:03] <@The4dotelipsis> It has happened, it does happen, it will happen. [21:03] <@Havac> Fourdot, I agree that the raw material is definitely there. [21:03] <@Havac> I just think we should wait until it's molded into a more usable form. [21:03] <@The4dotelipsis> I see both Grey's and Havac's points. [21:03] <@Grey-man> for sure...exactly [21:03] <@The4dotelipsis> But the thing is this. [21:03] <@The4dotelipsis> He's not the only one reviewing the article. [21:03] <@Havac> Maybe that means we actively take an interest in helping him mold it. [21:03] <@The4dotelipsis> He is one of several. [21:03] <@Graestan> My largest fear is getting a new Inq who approves everything, and Hobbes just wouldn't do that. [21:03] <@The4dotelipsis> So he'll cover one set of things, and everyone else finds other things. [21:03] <@Havac> Grae: that's my largest as well. [21:04] <@The4dotelipsis> It's not like we'd depend upon him to be the only one to object to an article. [21:04] <@The4dotelipsis> So it's OK if things slip through. It's the things he does get that counts. [21:04] <@The4dotelipsis> Everyone has different things that they find and object to in articles. [21:05] <@Havac> No, certainly not. But I hesitate to approve him now, flaws and all, when those flaws could be resolved in a year or two if we work with him so that he can be vastly better when we actually give him powah. [21:05] <@Grey-man> I say give him the another month or two, see the work he does on that article that Havac (or whoever) mentioned, and see where he stands in one or two Inq meetins from now [21:05] <@Grey-man> *meetings [21:05] <@Graestan> per Greyman, and I'll note that I basically proposed such earlier. [21:06] <@The4dotelipsis> OK, I just want to gauge the entire room and see where this issue stands. [21:06] <@Grey-man> I think the current group of Inqs is working fine, and I don't see any problems for the rest of 2007, IMO [21:06] <@Imperialles> The current group of Inqs? [21:06] <@Grey-man> go for it, 4dot [21:06] <@The4dotelipsis> Well... [21:06] <@Imperialles> Let's face it, not even half are contributing the amount they should. [21:06] <@The4dotelipsis> Everyone? [21:06] <@Havac> OK, but I also don't want to get into a situation where the same two or so people get brought up month after month with not much changing on the hope they'll somehow get through. [21:06] <@The4dotelipsis> Right. [21:07] <@The4dotelipsis> Which is why I want to gauge this now, so I can forget about until December. [21:07] <@The4dotelipsis> Or not. [21:07] <@Grey-man> Imp > What I meant is, we are getting the job done for the time being [21:07] <@Imperialles> That's true. [21:07] <@Havac> If someone gets rejected, they shouldn't be brought back up for at least several months. [21:07] <@Grey-man> Point [21:07] <@Imperialles> That is entirely up to the nominator, Havac. [21:08] <@Havac> It is. But I'd hope they'd not try to be so pushy. [21:08] <@Havac> Just like CTs. [21:08] <@The4dotelipsis> I'm only doing this because I didn't quite understand the extent or full reasoning of the objection last time. [21:08] <@Havac> It's commonly understood to be bad form to push the same CT over and over again as soon as the last one closes. [21:08] <@Imperialles> Like the "No Fanon" camp, you mean? [21:08] <@Darth_Culator> Bah! [21:08] <@Havac> Give it a few months and see if things change. [21:08] <@The4dotelipsis> To quote Fawlty Towers, "I've not been given the chance." [21:08] <@Havac> No, I don't have a problem with Fourdot's bringing this back up. [21:08] <@Graestan> No? [21:09] <@Havac> But if we're going to have Hobbes and Acky brought up month after month. . . I'm just trying to head that off at the pass. [21:09] <@Graestan> I don't think new Inqs will come out of nowhere. I don't want to turn my back on either for now. [21:09] <@The4dotelipsis> Well, I'll drop it when I get yays or nays from everyone. ;) [21:10] <@Graestan> Yay on both (unless "wait a month" is a good answer) [21:10] <@Grey-man> Nay on both for now, or at least the next couple months. [21:10] * Xwing328 (i=Xwing328@unaffiliated/xwing328) has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius [21:10] * ChanServ sets mode: +o Xwing328 [21:10] <@Havac> Wait on it. [21:11] <@Imperialles> It seems the majority wants to wait, so I'll vote for that as well. [21:11] <@Graestan> Two meetings' hence? Or one? [21:11] <@Imperialles> We want Inqs that all of us, or at least most of us, trust. [21:11] <@Imperialles> We'll see, Grae. [21:11] <@Graestan> per Imp [21:11] <@Grey-man> yes, per Imp [21:13] <@The4dotelipsis> Culator? Jaina? Hydro? Xwing? [21:13] <@The4dotelipsis> Oh, wait. [21:13] <@LordHydronium> Hm? Wait and see works for me. [21:13] <@The4dotelipsis> Xwing: We're talking about the possible inclusion of Acky and Hobbes into the Inquisitorius fold. [21:13] <@LordHydronium> Or is this a discussion as to when? [21:13] <@Grey-man> LH > No, you're good :) [21:13] <@Graestan> Yes, No, or Wait, I think. [21:13] <@Xwing328> has anybody had objections to them? [21:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Most people want to wait and see. [21:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Opinion is divided on the matter. [21:14] <@The4dotelipsis> I want to accept Hobbes, at least, now. [21:14] <@The4dotelipsis> Everyone else doesn't. [21:14] <@Graestan> Both show promise, but both raise doubts. [21:14] <@Xwing328> I don't have anything against, personally [21:14] <@Graestan> I think each would do better than we'd expect. [21:15] <@Xwing328> and help is welcome imo [21:15] <@LordHydronium> 4dot: Like I said, my impression of Hobbes has been positive, but I wouldn't mind taking a closer look at the stuff Havac and Grae bring up. [21:15] <@Xwing328> Did you guys already discuss Gantu? [21:15] <@Graestan> Yes. [21:15] <@Havac> Yes. Murderated. [21:15] <@Xwing328> and? [21:15] <@Graestan> He's dead. [21:15] <@Xwing328> ok good [21:17] * Grey-man changes topic to 'FA Nazis: "NO STAR FOR YOU!"�' [21:17] <@Graestan> Is that it for now? [21:17] <@Grey-man> yes [21:17] <@Graestan> Okiedokie. [21:17] <@Grey-man> meeting is over