- "We is teh evil."
Our first meeting went better than expected. Go look at the log if you don't believe me. Sorry I made the announcement so late, so if you weren't able to attend. Sorry. Now for the next one, we're going to do same time next week (if you don't have an IRC client go get one) and start to weed through the next 12 past FAs to make sure that they're up to snuff.
So same thing as last week, we need at least 7 Inquisitors to attend, if we can get more, all the better. However, we only need 7 votes to go through, so during the chat, unless you're going against the flow, if we get to 7 votes for a removal, then you missed out. It seems that we're just going to make these meeting an hour in length, so prepare to be there on time please.
Oh yeah, you might want to skim these articles, so you actually have a little bit of a handle on the situation.
Articles up for re-assessmentEdit
- Yoda—FA status removed.
- Imperial I-class Star Destroyer—FA status removed.
- Chiss—FA status removed.
- Beilert Valance—FA status removed.
- Ulic Qel-Droma—FA status removed.
- Exar Kun—FA status removed.
- Gilad Pellaeon—FA status removed.
- Lumiya—FA status kept.
- Anakin Solo—FA status removed.
- Galactic Republic Chancery election, 32 BBY—FA status kept.
- Darth Bane—FA status removed.
- Rokur Gepta—FA status removed.
Put whatever you want here, so far it seems we'll need to discuss:
Roll of the MAL, why do we have this distinction?This no longer exists. Atarumaster88 (Audience Chamber) 01:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Notifying the main contributor of articles? Should we do this? Or is a template on the article's main and talk pages good enough?
- New Inquisitors, apparently Imp and McEwok want a shot. Should we put them up for community vote right away or wait a little?
- Writing the reasons and putting up the template. We need to make sure this is done write away. Should we assign people to do it or will a few be taking personal responsibilty?
- Why not do FA nom passage on the IRC too? .... 03:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- Requirements. Should we have them?
- Whatever happened to StarNeptune, and should we start a manhunt err...womanhunt?
- I might be there. Atarumaster88 (Audience Chamber) 01:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
- I'll be there if you let me in. --Imp 19:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Okie-day. - Lord Hydronium 08:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'll be there now, just to smack Hydro for quoting Jar Jar. Havac 18:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Quitting was fun. Maybe I'll do it again! .... 09:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Jaina Solo(Goddess Stuff) 17:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Deepest Regrets, and insult these people as much as possible in the meetingEdit
- Cull Tremayne 01:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC) -- I'll be away from a computer. We'll need another Master of Ceremonies.
- Looks like I'll be at the airport, so unless I get free wireless... —Xwing328(Talk) 15:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Just as a friendly reminder.
- Eyrezer=12pm Sunday
Ataru writes some stuff, I guessEdit
- Yoda; Remove
- ISD: Remove
- Chiss: Remove; redlinks, intro
- Beilert Valance: Keep; intro, sourcing
- Ulic: Remove; intro, sourcing; sectioning
- Pelleaon: Remove; lack of detail in later life, sourcing
- Lumiya: Remove; sectioning
- Anakin Solo: Remove- see Mirlen's talk page- NOTE, I changed my mind after leaving IRC. THIS is the proper vote. Atarumaster88 (Audience Chamber) 23:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Election: Keep
- Darth Bane: Keep
- Rokur Gepta: Remove; intro, redlinks, sectioning
All articles save Lumiya and Galactic Republic Chancery election, 32 BBY had their FA status removed. Imperialles was admitted to the Inquisitorius. Consensus was to not make it obligatory to notify the "main contributor" to an article of it's removal of FA status. There was no consensus as to whether or not to do FA nom passage on the IRC channel. Consensus was to have Inquisitorius requirements. StarNeptune was found. -- 01:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)