* Topic is 'The Inquisitorius |�'
* Set by GrandMoffTranner on Sat Nov 28 13:18:57
[18:54] <@GrandMoffTranner> !hieveryone
[18:54] <@ChackJadson> !fail
[18:54] <@GrandMoffTranner> Damn, that's not the command.
[18:54] <@ChackJadson> :P
[18:54] <@Grunny> !hieverybody
[18:54] <@Nuku-Nuku> Hello, CavalierOne, CC7567, ChackJadson, ChanServ, Darth_Culator, GrandMoffTranner, Grunny, Nuku-Nuku, Tommy9281, and Toprawa !!!
[18:54] <@ChackJadson> 18:54]	<Nuku-Nuku>	Error: "fail" is not a valid command.
[18:54] <@ChackJadson> It should be
[18:54] <@GrandMoffTranner>  /That/ is fail.
[18:54] <@CavalierOne> Yes. Its ironic.
[18:55] <@Tommy9281> Good evening.
[18:55] <@Toprawa> hey Tommy
[18:55] <@GrandMoffTranner> I've always wondered; why does Nuku bother greeting herself?
[18:56] <@GrandMoffTranner> And btw - hey Tommy. :p
[18:57] <@Grunny> because it just gets a list of nicks in the channel
[18:57] <@Grunny> hence why it greets chanserv too :P
[18:57] <@GrandMoffTranner> Well, I always just assumed that Nuku and ChanServ were old pals who don't get to talk much.
[18:58] * IFYLOFD (n=REDACTED@gateway/web/cgi-irc/ has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius
[18:58] * ChanServ sets mode: +o IFYLOFD
[18:58] * Nuku-Nuku sets mode: +o IFYLOFD
[18:58] <@ChackJadson> Floyd
[18:58] <@IFYLOFD> Wacko Chacko.
[18:58] <@Grunny> Floydingo
[18:58] <@ChackJadson> !markov
[18:58] <@Nuku-Nuku> Ah, I see.
[18:58] <@Toprawa> Floyd
[18:58] <@CC7567> Floyderoid.
[18:58] <@GrandMoffTranner> Floyd-a-loyd.
[18:59] <@ChackJadson> IFYLOFD :P
[18:59] * @Grunny slaps Chack
[18:59] <@IFYLOFD> Yope, Grunndawg Millionaire, CC Sabathia, Trannus T. Tranman.
[19:00] <@Toprawa> Let's get this show on the road.
[19:00] <@IFYLOFD> We have two feet of snow out here.B)
[19:00] <@Grunny> Okay, it's go time
[19:00] <@Grunny> Thanks all for showing up
[19:00] <@ChackJadson> Floyd: we have like 1 foot at least
[19:00] * @Toprawa shoveled two feet of snow today
[19:00] <@Grunny> Welcome to Inqmoot XXX
[19:01] <@ChackJadson> !markov Greetings
[19:01] <@ChackJadson> Ok, sorry
[19:01] <@Grunny> Starting off with probed articles from last meeting
[19:01] <@Grunny> First up 501st
[19:01] <@Grunny>
[19:01] <@ChackJadson> Though it took me a long time, I think it is much improved. I vote keep
[19:01] <@ChackJadson> CC helped, too
[19:01] <@Toprawa> Chack, convince me why we should at best not extend this thing again, with all due respect.
[19:01] <@Toprawa> It still looks incomplete.
[19:02] <@ChackJadson> Well, what about it?
[19:02] <@Toprawa> not at best extend*, rather
[19:02] <@Toprawa> The things that pop out to me are the images in the Members section appears to be incomplete
[19:02] <@Toprawa> I think the intro is kind of weak with the new changes
[19:02] <@ChackJadson> You mean how there are only a few images?
[19:02] <@ChackJadson> in that section?
[19:02] <@Toprawa> well, it's like you added images half way through and then stopped
[19:03] <@Toprawa> And has anyone actually reviewed these changes yet?
[19:03] <@Toprawa> That's my biggest concern.
[19:03] <@ChackJadson> I didn't think there was good spacing with another image, but now that you mention it, it does seem like one (or two) more would be good
[19:03] <@ChackJadson> I can rewrite the intro
[19:03] <@Toprawa> It seems like the whole article underwent an overhaul
[19:04] <@ChackJadson> Yes, that is true
[19:04] <@Toprawa> I wouldn't mind extending the probe one last time.
[19:05] <@Toprawa> But I would expect this thing to complete by then.
[19:05] <@ChackJadson> If you guys want that, it's ok with me, I guess
[19:05] <@Toprawa> this would be like the third time
[19:05] <@ChackJadson> Second time extended :P
[19:05] <@ChackJadson> Admittedly, I dragged my feet on this
[19:05] <@ChackJadson> I apologize for that
[19:05] <@Toprawa> Any other opinions?
[19:06] <@CavalierOne> If Chack agrees to extension on the probe, then I'd vote to extend.
[19:06] <@GrandMoffTranner> Per Cav.
[19:06] <@IFYLOFD> Fine, extend.
[19:06] <@CC7567> Per Cav
[19:06] <@Tommy9281> Per Cav
[19:06] <@Grunny> extend
[19:06] <@Toprawa> Extend
[19:07] <@Grunny> Extended
[19:07] <@Grunny> Next up:
[19:07] <@Grunny>
[19:07] <@Grunny>
[19:07] <@Grunny> No changes made
[19:07] <@Grunny> kill
[19:07] <@CC7567> Kill.
[19:07] <@Tommy9281> Kill
[19:07] <@IFYLOFD> Kill.
[19:07] <@ChackJadson> kill
[19:07] <@GrandMoffTranner> Kill.
[19:07] <@Toprawa> Kill
[19:07] <@Darth_Culator> Kill, but DRAMATICALLY!
[19:07] <@CavalierOne> Kill
[19:08] <@Grunny> killed
[19:09] <@ChackJadson> Oh, before we go any further
[19:09] <@ChackJadson> Gt told me to make sure that you all know he left notes on the meeting page
[19:09] <@Toprawa> Noted :P
[19:09] <@ChackJadson> Cool
[19:10] <@Grunny> haha
[19:10] <@Grunny> Okay, Battle of Ryloth:
[19:10] <@Grunny>
[19:10] <@Grunny>
[19:10] <@Toprawa> Keep
[19:10] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:10] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:10] <@Grunny> keepers
[19:10] <@Tommy9281> It looks good to me.
[19:10] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keep.
[19:10] <@CC7567> Keep, if I do say so myself :P
[19:10] <@IFYLOFD> Keeparino.
[19:10] <@Darth_Culator> TCW. Kill by default.
[19:11] * @Darth_Culator is kidding.
[19:11] <@Grunny> haha
[19:11] <@GrandMoffTranner> Very tempted to side with Culator on that one.
[19:11] <@CC7567> :P
[19:11] <@Grunny> kept
[19:11] <@CavalierOne> Ditto :P
[19:11] <@Grunny> Aunt Beru:
[19:11] <@Grunny>
[19:11] <@Grunny>
[19:11] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:12] <@Grunny> keep
[19:12] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:12] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keepify.
[19:12] <@CC7567> Keep.
[19:12] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:12] <@Toprawa> Keep per those changes, but the length of the P/T kind of bothers me.
[19:12] <@Toprawa> I don't know what else could go in there not knowing the material, but I'd wager there's more
[19:12] <@Tommy9281> The intro length bothers me slightly, but not enough to kill.
[19:13] <@Tommy9281> Keep.
[19:13] <@GrandMoffTranner> The P/T could probably be expanded...
[19:13] <@IFYLOFD> P/T could definitely be expanded.
[19:14] <@IFYLOFD> That's a major problem. There's definitely more that could and should go in there.
[19:14] <@Toprawa> The level of detail is really not up to par
[19:14] <@Toprawa> "Years later, Beru would play with her nephew Luke."
[19:14] <@GrandMoffTranner> Yeah. I don't know... extend probe, perhaps?
[19:15] <@Darth_Culator> Yeah, probe Beru. But only young Beru.
[19:15] <@IFYLOFD> Extend probe and fix this crap.
[19:15] <@Toprawa> Extend probe
[19:15] <@Grunny> extend
[19:15] <@ChackJadson> Extend is fine with me
[19:15] <@GrandMoffTranner> Culator, it was only a matter of time until someone said that. :p
[19:15] <@Grunny> sorry, I'm distracted by a vandal on the Wook :P
[19:15] <@GrandMoffTranner> But yeah, extend probe.
[19:15] <@CavalierOne> Extend. For young Beru.
[19:15] <@CC7567> Extend, then
[19:16] <@Darth_Culator> Right, extended. Someone remember to update the Inq page.
[19:17] <@Grunny> k
[19:17] <@ChackJadson> We'll do paperwork later :P
[19:17] <@Grunny> first of the clones:
[19:17] <@Grunny>
[19:17] <@Grunny>
[19:17] <@Tommy9281> Ugh
[19:17] <@IFYLOFD> Ol' Baconhead.
[19:17] <@CC7567> Been fixed, at least
[19:17] <@Toprawa> Keep
[19:18] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:18] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:18] <@Grunny> keepers
[19:18] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keep.
[19:18] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:18] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:18] <@IFYLOFD> Best. Hairstyle. Ever.
[19:18] <@Tommy9281> He can stay.
[19:18] <@Grunny> okay, kept
[19:18] <@Grunny> next clone:
[19:18] <@Grunny>
[19:18] <@Grunny>
[19:18] <@Tommy9281> And Dace Diath had better hair.
[19:18] <@Toprawa> Keep
[19:18] <@CC7567> Same; keep
[19:19] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:19] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keep.
[19:19] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:19] <@Tommy9281> Keep.
[19:19] <@Grunny> keep
[19:19] <@ChackJadson> keep
[19:19] <@Grunny> kept
[19:19] <@Grunny> next up:
[19:19] <@Grunny>
[19:19] <@Grunny>
[19:19] <@CC7567> Eh.
[19:20] <@Grunny> a regular here at Inq meetings
[19:20] <@Toprawa> What is the deal with this article?
[19:20] <@Toprawa> Per Grunny
[19:20] <@CC7567> Is it going to get probed every single time a new issue is released?
[19:20] <@CC7567> Yes, per Grunny
[19:20] <@Grunny> not every issue
[19:20] <@ChackJadson> Well, Fourdot FAed it
[19:20] <@Grunny> but every few
[19:20] <@ChackJadson> He is no longer with us
[19:20] <@CC7567> Eh.
[19:20] <@ChackJadson> And Wyyrlok is a major character
[19:20] <@Toprawa> This is why we have FAN Rule 5.
[19:20] <@Grunny> I'd rather see it redone when he dies
[19:20] <@Toprawa> …following the review process, be stable, i.e. it does not change significantly from day to day
[19:21] <@Toprawa> Meaning something shouldn't be an FA and require an update every new comic issue
[19:21] <@CC7567> Well, we've really have to probe it every time because no one seems to want to update it by choice
[19:21] <@CC7567> If someone showed dedication enough without having to wait for the moot, then it would be different
[19:21] <@GrandMoffTranner> Considering Fourdot's absence, I may take this up one day. However, for the time being, I'm going to have to vote kill.
[19:22] <@IFYLOFD> Kill per Rule 5.
[19:22] <@CavalierOne> Its not that hard, tho. I make sure Treis Sinde is updated every issue he appears in.
[19:22] <@GrandMoffTranner> There is no reason to keep extending the probe if the nominator is not around to update it.
[19:22] <@Grunny> Yeah, but you're around regularly
[19:22] <@Grunny> this article has no consistent updator
[19:23] <@Toprawa> Well
[19:23] <@Darth_Culator> Send it to the Island of Misfit Articles and be done with it.
[19:23] <@Toprawa> Just kill it.
[19:23] <@ChackJadson> Per Culator
[19:23] <@CC7567> Kill.
[19:23] <@GrandMoffTranner> My vote is kill.
[19:23] <@CavalierOne> Reluctant kill.
[19:23] <@Toprawa> If he dies and someone wants to rewrite and clean it up then, fine
[19:23] <@Grunny> unless someone wants to commit to updating it regularly, kill
[19:24] <@Grunny> I just don't want to see it back here in a few months
[19:24] <@Tommy9281> But if someone updates it every issue, then what is the problem?
[19:24] <@Tommy9281> I'll commit to it
[19:24] <@Grunny> but they aren't
[19:24] <@Grunny> Well it needs to be updated before it gets probed
[19:24] <@Toprawa> Which it never is
[19:24] <@Grunny> It was meant to go on the main page earlier this month, but had to be pushed back and swapped with another article because it wasn't up to date
[19:25] <@Toprawa> I still vote to kill. I'm tired of seeing this thing on the chopping block.
[19:25] <@Grunny> Can you promise to update it before it gets probed Tommy?
[19:25] <@Tommy9281> Per Cav. It's not hard, its just a matter of someon e being willing to do it.
[19:25] <@Tommy9281> You mean as in right now?
[19:25] <@Grunny> I mean in the future
[19:25] <@Tommy9281> Yup.
[19:25] <@Tommy9281> When the issue comes out, I'll take care of it. No big deal.
[19:25] <@Grunny> If he appears in a new issue, I want to know it will be updated before the Inq has a chance to probe it
[19:26] <@Grunny> he's been here too many times
[19:26] <@Tommy9281> As project lead, are you not interested in keeping it's FA status?
[19:26] <@CC7567> I'd assume not when it doesn't meet FA standards.
[19:27] <@Grunny> yes, of course, but at the same time I'm an Inq who wants to see articles kept up to date and up to FA standards
[19:27] <@Tommy9281> That question was for Grunny.
[19:27] <@Grunny> especially when it is scheduled to appear on the main page
[19:27] <@GrandMoffTranner> Honestly, I don't see the need for further discussion. Tommy, if you want to update this, then you need to commit to it. But if you're not going to, it needs to be killed now.
[19:27] <@Darth_Culator> Just because someone's a project lead doesn't mean they can adopt every orphaned article.
[19:27] <@Tommy9281> No problem. I'll work on it to the best of my abilities.
[19:27] <@Grunny> okay, then I'll change to keep per Tommy
[19:28] <@IFYLOFD> Keep per TOMMY.
[19:28] <@ChackJadson> Keep per Tommy
[19:28] * @Toprawa still votes Kill
[19:28] <@Grunny> But if it appears here again, it gets killed
[19:28] <@Darth_Culator> I change my vote from kill to meh.
[19:28] <@CavalierOne> Per Grunny.
[19:29] <@Tommy9281> No problem there.
[19:29] <@GrandMoffTranner> Honestly, I'd rather see it killed now and renominated later on, preferably when Legacy is over or Wyyrlok is dead.
[19:29] <@GrandMoffTranner> No offense to Tommy.
[19:30] <@Tommy9281> None taken.
[19:30] <@Tommy9281> But You do have a point. Perhaps it is better that way.
[19:30] <@CC7567> If it's going to undergo rewrites (as most likely it will), I really think it needs the FAN process to upkeep it.
[19:30] <@CC7567> I have to still say kill.
[19:30] <@GrandMoffTranner> All things considered, I still vote to kill.
[19:30] <@Grunny> you can always keep it updated and when he dies or the series is over, you can  overhaul it fully and re-nom it
[19:30] <@Tommy9281> There may come a time where I'm not able to update it in a timely fashion, and I don't want it to be killed based on that. Let it die for now, and handled later.
[19:31] <@Grunny> okay, then...
[19:31] <@Grunny> kill per Tommy :P
[19:31] <@IFYLOFD> Kill.
[19:31] <@ChackJadson> Kill per Tommy
[19:31] <@Grunny> killed with fire
[19:31] * @Toprawa voices his Kill vote for the fourth time :P
[19:31] <@CC7567> Kill.
[19:31] <@Grunny> okay, moving on
[19:31] <@Grunny>
[19:31] <@Grunny>
[19:31] <@Toprawa> This thing needs to go
[19:32] <@IFYLOFD> Kill.
[19:32] <@Grunny> kill
[19:32] <@Toprawa> We might as well create an Organization layout
[19:32] <@Toprawa> "Members"
[19:32] <@IFYLOFD> Even though it involves Waru.
[19:32] <@Grunny> Eyre said he'll renom it whenever it's ready
[19:32] <@Toprawa> Kill
[19:32] <@GrandMoffTranner> In the spirit of the holiday season, I vote to kill it.
[19:32] <@CavalierOne> Kill
[19:32] <@CC7567> Kill per Grunny
[19:33] <@ChackJadson> KIll
[19:33] <@Grunny> killed
[19:33] <@Grunny>
[19:33] <@Grunny>
[19:33] <@Toprawa> I might kill anyone who cracks the joke.
[19:33] <@ChackJadson> Hold the jokes, please
[19:33] <@Toprawa> haha
[19:34] <@Grunny> keepers, GT updated it
[19:34] <@Toprawa> Keep
[19:34] <@GrandMoffTranner> I'll keep her.
[19:34] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:34] <@CC7567> Keep.
[19:34] <@GrandMoffTranner> As much as I'd like to probe her...
[19:34] <@Darth_Culator> I already fulfilled the quota of probe jokes. So keep.
[19:34] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:34] <@Grunny> kept
[19:35] <@Tommy9281> Keep
[19:35] <@Grunny> Kaox Krul:
[19:35] <@Grunny>
[19:35] <@Grunny>
[19:35] <@Toprawa> Kill it and its 2007 standards
[19:35] <@ChackJadson> kill
[19:35] <@GrandMoffTranner> Let's be krul and kill it.
[19:35] <@CavalierOne> Krul to be kind. Kill.
[19:35] <@Grunny> killify
[19:35] <@CC7567> Kill plz
[19:36] <@Tommy9281> Kill it
[19:36] <@ChackJadson> heh at CC
[19:36] <@Grunny> killed
[19:36] <@Grunny> next:
[19:37] <@Grunny>
[19:37] <@Grunny>
[19:37] <@CC7567> Oh dear.
[19:37] <@IFYLOFD> I'm back. What'd I miss?
[19:37] <@ChackJadson> We are on Mara
[19:37] <@IFYLOFD> Looks updated.
[19:38] <@IFYLOFD> I vote keep.
[19:38] <@Grunny> though I'd like to see this article far more detailed
[19:38] <@IFYLOFD> Well we can extend probe if you wish.
[19:39] <@IFYLOFD> Any thoughts?
[19:39] <@Grunny> keep
[19:39] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:40] <@Grunny> it's been updated
[19:40] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:40] <@CC7567> Eh, keep
[19:40] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keep her.
[19:40] <@Grunny> kept
[19:40] <@Grunny> moving on
[19:40] <@Grunny>
[19:40] <@Grunny>
[19:40] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:41] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:41] <@Grunny> keep
[19:41] <@Darth_Culator> Yep.
[19:41] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keeperate.
[19:41] <@Tommy9281> I hve to go
[19:41] <@ChackJadson> Bye
[19:41] <@CC7567> Keep.
[19:41] <@Grunny> bye
[19:41] <@CC7567> See you Tommy
[19:41] <@Grunny> kept
[19:41] <@Grunny> next:
[19:42] <@Grunny>
[19:42] <@Grunny>
[19:42] <@ChackJadson> Kill
[19:42] <@Grunny> no change
[19:42] <@IFYLOFD> Kill.
[19:42] <@Grunny> kill
[19:42] <@CC7567> KILL WITH NO MERCY
[19:42] <@Toprawa> Kill
[19:42] <@GrandMoffTranner> Kill the mutant.
[19:42] * @Tommy9281 (n=REDACTED@gateway/web/cgi-irc/ Quit ("CGI:IRC"�)
[19:42] <@CavalierOne> Kill.
[19:42] <@Grunny> killed
[19:42] <@IFYLOFD> Don't worry, my mutant friend. I will Re-FA you someday.
[19:42] <@Grunny> Now moving on to new articles
[19:42] <@Grunny> articles with update tags first:
[19:43] <@Grunny>
[19:43] <@Grunny>
[19:43] <@Grunny>
[19:43] <@Grunny> probe probe probe
[19:43] <@ChackJadson> ...
[19:43] <@Grunny> :P
[19:43] <@Toprawa> PROBIFY
[19:43] <@Toprawa> PROBATE
[19:43] <@ChackJadson> But ok, probe probe probe :P
[19:43] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:43] <@ChackJadson> Sorry Des
[19:43] <@GrandMoffTranner> TRIPLE KIll... er, I mean, triple probe.
[19:43] <@ChackJadson> I will avenge you!
[19:43] <@CavalierOne> Probe, probe, and probe.
[19:43] <@CC7567> Probe all three
[19:43] <@CC7567> Bane in particular will probably need some scrutinizing later; no offense to whoever writes it, it's just because of the sheer length
[19:44] <@ChackJadson> Yeah
[19:44] <@Toprawa> per CC
[19:44] <@IFYLOFD> Bouuuuuussssh.
[19:44] <@Grunny> probed
[19:44] <@Grunny> -- Updated. Green Tentacle (Talk) 03:21, December 12, 2009 (UTC)
[19:44] <@Grunny> keep
[19:44] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:44] <@GrandMoffTranner> Keep.
[19:44] <@CavalierOne> Keep
[19:44] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:44] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:44] <@Toprawa> Keep
[19:44] <@Grunny> kept
[19:44] <@Grunny>
[19:45] <@ChackJadson> K is for keep
[19:45] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:45] <@IFYLOFD> A shame, since I was looking forward to probing her.
[19:45] <@CC7567> What exactly is the state of the article right now?
[19:45] <@CC7567> Fully updated?
[19:45] <@Toprawa> wait a minute
[19:45] <@Grunny> it's being updated at the moment?
[19:45] <@ChackJadson> He's not done yet
[19:45] <@CC7567> Because I think Red still has the WIP on it
[19:45] <@Toprawa> scroll down and look at this thing?
[19:45] <@Toprawa> Probe.
[19:45] <@CC7567> Oh.
[19:45] <@Grunny> it's a wip by the look of it
[19:45] <@ChackJadson> Hmm, wrong article, sorry
[19:45] <@Grunny> probe
[19:45] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:45] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:45] <@CC7567> Probe
[19:45] <@ChackJadson> Probe, then
[19:45] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:46] <@Grunny> probed
[19:46] <@Toprawa> I still say Relationship sections are entirely unnecessary
[19:46] <@Grunny> moving on:
[19:46] <@Toprawa> but...meh
[19:46] <@Grunny>
[19:46] <@Grunny>
[19:46] <@Grunny>
[19:46] <@Grunny> -- where the little things like properly using the {{CW}} template begin to build up. Appearance in Labyrinth of Evil (if any) also needs to be verified. CC7567 (talk) 16:06, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
[19:46] <@Grunny> probe probe probe probe
[19:46] <@Grunny> :P
[19:46] <@Toprawa> Can't we just kill all of these, damnit?
[19:46] <@ChackJadson> Ok, per him
[19:46] <@GrandMoffTranner> Tetra-probe.
[19:46] <@IFYLOFD> Probe, probe, probe, probe.
[19:46] <@CC7567> Quad-probe
[19:46] <@ChackJadson> Tope, I wish
[19:46] <@Toprawa> KILL THEM NOW
[19:46] <@ChackJadson> Wait on Panaka
[19:46] <@CavalierOne> Probes!
[19:46] <@ChackJadson> GT says: Panaka: Not sure what's missing. The only reference to him I could find in the Atlas is about him being Moff of the Chommell sector, and it's already there.
[19:46] <@ChackJadson> Anyone know what the deal on him is?
[19:47] <@ChackJadson> Panaka, not GT :P
[19:47] <@Toprawa> Panaka has missing Atlas info
[19:47] <@Toprawa> I added the Update tag myself.
[19:47] <@ChackJadson> More than that, then?
[19:47] <@Toprawa> Yes
[19:47] <@ChackJadson> Ok, rpobe
[19:47] <@Grunny> probed all four
[19:47] <@Grunny> moving onto other new articles for review
[19:47] <@CC7567> And add a Bts check to Ossus
[19:47] <@Grunny> — missing BTS. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 23:10, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
[19:47] <@Grunny> Has much more serious issues than just a missing BTS. Requires major sourcing clean-up, and that list should be prosified. Toprawa and Ralltiir 00:16, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
[19:47] <@Grunny> probe
[19:47] <@CC7567> Probe.
[19:47] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:47] <@CavalierOne> Probe.
[19:47] <@Toprawa> Kill
[19:47] <@IFYLOFD> Kill.
[19:47] <@Toprawa> haha
[19:48] <@Grunny> haha
[19:48] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:48] <@Grunny> probed
[19:48] <@Grunny> — this can really use an intro expansion and a good copyedit as well in terms of context, linking, and overall basics of writing. CC7567 (talk) 23:12, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
[19:48] <@Grunny> probe
[19:48] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:48] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:48] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:49] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:49] <@CC7567> Probe, even if it ends up being me who gets to it later
[19:49] <@Toprawa> PROBE
[19:49] <@Grunny> probed
[19:49] <@Grunny> — partially unsourced infobox. --Xd1358 Talk 07:00, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
[19:49] <@Grunny>  
[19:49] <@Grunny> — near-completely unsourced infobox, intro in need of expansion, lack of adherence to the LG, and overall copyedit needed. CC7567 (talk) 08:45, December 13, 2009 (UTC)
[19:49] <@Grunny> Probe
[19:49] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:49] <@Toprawa> PROBE
[19:49] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:49] <@CC7567> Probe
[19:49] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:49] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:49] <@Grunny> probed
[19:50] <@Grunny> — unsourced infobox term and multiple OOU "unidentified" usages in the IU text. Judging from those, a copyedit might be warranted, as well as a check against the current Layout Guide. CC7567 (talk) 08:33, December 13, 2009 (UTC)
[19:50] <@CavalierOne> Probe, but I'll take responsibility for it if Acky is agreeable.
[19:50] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:50] <@Grunny> unsourced infobox item sturck, but probe for the rest
[19:50] <@Grunny> struck*
[19:50] <@ChackJadson> Gt says keep
[19:50] <@CavalierOne> Needs better sourcing on DarkStryder info :P
[19:50] <@Toprawa> Seriously?
[19:50] <@ChackJadson> Yes
[19:50] <@Toprawa> to Cav's comment, I mean
[19:50] <@CavalierOne> I believe so.
[19:51] <@ChackJadson> Oh :P
[19:51] <@Toprawa> Probe, then
[19:51] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:51] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:51] <@CC7567> Probe
[19:51] <@CavalierOne> Especially since I source DS info to specific adventures.
[19:51] <@Grunny> probed
[19:51] <@Grunny> — at least one unsourced fact and enough grammatical errors to put its status in doubt. Also needs to conform to the LG. CC7567 (talk) 08:45, December 13, 2009 (UTC)
[19:51] <@Grunny> Killed the sourceless bit. Green Tentacle (Talk) 20:20, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
[19:52] <@Toprawa> the LG thing can be fixed in two seconds
[19:52] <@Grunny> probe for the grammatical stuff needing fixed
[19:52] <@Toprawa> also, is the level of detail up to par?
[19:52] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:52] <@Toprawa> this thing was passed a long time ago, I think
[19:52] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:52] <@Toprawa> I've never played this game, so I don't knnow
[19:52] <@Grunny> CC, you've been through it, thoughts?
[19:53] <@Grunny> on the grammar side of it
[19:53] <@CC7567> I actually can't remember what I saw now :P
[19:53] <@CC7567> Let me look
[19:53] <@CC7567> Add a ton of speculation to the issues to be fixed
[19:53] <@Grunny> okay, probe
[19:53] <@GrandMoffTranner> Then probe.
[19:54] <@CC7567> Yeah, probe
[19:54] <@Toprawa> Probe
[19:55] <@Toprawa> VOTE NOW!
[19:55] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:55] <@Toprawa> VOTE NOW!
[19:55] <@Grunny> probed
[19:55] <@Grunny> moving onto Wes:
[19:55] <@Grunny> — intro could use some cleaning/expansion, succession boxes could use some sourcing, and the necessity of the "See also" section could use some checking. CC7567 (talk) 08:01, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
[19:55] <@Grunny> probe
[19:55] <@Toprawa> Does anyone even keep this thing up to date?
[19:55] <@Toprawa> Aside from his piloting skills, Janson was a gunner, first and foremost. He was regarded as a deadly shot with blasters and skilled at hand-to-hand combat. When not fighting, he was known for his practical jokes and witticisms among his fellow pilots.
[19:55] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:55] <@Toprawa> I added that sentence into the intro as a noob
[19:55] <@ChackJadson> Intro isn't great
[19:55] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probify.
[19:55] <@ChackJadson> hahaha
[19:55] <@CC7567> Good question.
[19:55] <@Toprawa> why is it still there? :P
[19:55] <@GrandMoffTranner> Heh, nice.
[19:55] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:55] <@ChackJadson> It's a good sentence :P
[19:55] <@Toprawa> Just kill this thing
[19:56] <@CC7567> Probe. :P
[19:56] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:56] <@Toprawa> Probe
[19:56] <@Grunny> probed
[19:56] <@Grunny> — missing source in the infobox, and article could overall use a good copyedit for linking and a grammar check. CC7567 (talk) 06:59, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
[19:57] <@Grunny> Sourced the infobox bit. But needs a relatively small update from Millennium Falcon. Green Tentacle (Talk) 17:20, December 16, 2009 (UTC)
[19:57] <@CC7567> Probe
[19:57] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:57] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:57] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:57] <@Toprawa> UPDATE PROBE
[19:57] <@Grunny> probify
[19:57] <@Grunny> probed
[19:57] <@Grunny> :P
[19:57] <@Grunny> — borderlines WP:NPOV, an OOU perspective, and WP:MOS as far as "unknown"s go. Sectioning overall could use some work, and I'm sure that there are a lot more quotes that can be found and used. Also, the relevance of the info from Labyrinth of Evil is questionable. CC7567 (talk) 07:41, December 17, 2009 (UTC)
[19:57] <@Grunny> probe
[19:57] <@CC7567> Probe
[19:57] <@GrandMoffTranner> Probe.
[19:58] <@CavalierOne> Probe
[19:58] <@Toprawa> Probe
[19:58] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:58] <@GrandMoffTranner> Gotta go.
[19:58] <@Grunny> probed
[19:58] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:58] <@CC7567> Bye Tranner
[19:58] <@CavalierOne> Later Tranner
[19:58] <@Grunny> everything on the maintenance page has been probed, so moving onto discussion items
[19:58] * @GrandMoffTranner (n=Tranner@wikia/GrandMoffTranner) Quit ("I don't always drink beer, but when I do, I prefer Dos Equis."�)
[19:58] <@Toprawa> And we don't have to wait around for Fiolli's discussions points because he's not here :P
[19:58] <@CavalierOne> I have something - more food for thought than a solid proposal.
[19:58] <@ChackJadson> I have something minor
[19:59] <@Grunny> Fiolli didn't make it
[19:59] <@Grunny> so the first item will have to wait
[19:59] <@Grunny> I also want to discuss the relevance of the Triage since the removal of the tier system. I am curious if it is even useful anymore as it currently stands. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 23:06, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
[19:59] <@Grunny> I personally think the Triage is very useful
[19:59] <@Grunny> as it is far easier to navigate than the FAN page at the moment
[19:59] <@CC7567> That's for sure.
[20:00] <@Toprawa> hahaha
[20:00] <@Toprawa> Understatement of the year :P
[20:00] <@Grunny> so keep it :P
[20:00] <@CC7567> Yeah, keep
[20:00] <@IFYLOFD> I wanted to keep the tier system in the first place.
[20:00] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[20:00] <@Toprawa> It doesn't bother me
[20:00] <@Toprawa> it's not hurting anything
[20:01] <@Toprawa> and if people use it and find value in it, then let them keep it
[20:01] <@CC7567> Except our eyes :P
[20:01] <@Grunny> Triage kept :P
[20:01] <@Grunny> Slight reorganization of the FAN page to put nominations that reach long lengths onto a subpage since it ultimately gets moved there anyway. We had discussed this before but decided to table it to a later meeting. Let's talk about it again. — Fiolli {Alpheridies University ComNet} 23:06, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
[20:01] <@ChackJadson> Disagree with this
[20:01] <@Grunny> likewise I think this can wait until Fiolli can explain it fully
[20:01] <@CavalierOne> Tried it on GAN. Didn't work.
[20:01] <@CC7567> Per Cav.
[20:01] <@Toprawa> If anything is moved off the FAN page is will /never/ get looked at
[20:01] <@CC7567> Doesn't really help much, and definitely doesn't increase nom activity.
[20:01] <@Toprawa> The articles on the FAN page already don't get looked at
[20:01] <@Grunny> I think it became out of sight out of mind on the GAN page
[20:02] <@Darth_Culator> Let's just kill Lando. That will speed everything up.
[20:02] <@Toprawa> I also vote to remove Lando if we're doing that now
[20:02] <@Toprawa> It's been up there for over a year.
[20:02] <@CC7567> Epic meh.
[20:03] <@Grunny> despite the length, an article of that size should be cleaner and more complete before reaching the FAN
[20:03] <@ChackJadson> I vote kill on Lando
[20:03] <@IFYLOFD> Kill Lando.
[20:03] <@Grunny> kill
[20:03] <@CavalierOne> Kill.
[20:04] <@CC7567> Kill.
[20:04] <@Grunny> it's been up there too long
[20:04] <@Grunny> Lando killed
[20:04] <@Darth_Culator> Finally.
[20:04] <@Grunny> okay
[20:04] <@Grunny> Cav and Chack your items?
[20:04] <@ChackJadson> Ok
[20:05] <@Grunny> Cav can go first since he spoke first :P
[20:05] <@CavalierOne> Heh.
[20:05] <@ChackJadson> Ok
[20:05] <@CavalierOne> Basically just floating an idea and seeing if it has support.
[20:05] <@CavalierOne> How about reducing the number of Inq votes required to pass?
[20:05] <@CavalierOne> We're at sixty noms.
[20:05] <@CavalierOne> And Inws have resigned in the last few months.
[20:05] <@IFYLOFD> 61 now.
[20:06] <@Darth_Culator> Eesh.
[20:06] <@CavalierOne> Productivity is low.
[20:06] <@Toprawa> I would just as soon limit the number of noms allowed on the page at one time.
[20:06] <@Grunny> Per Tope
[20:06] <@Toprawa> More eyes looking at an article is worth the time, IMO
[20:06] <@ChackJadson> To what, Cav?
[20:06] <@IFYLOFD> Well then where would we put the others?
[20:06] <@IFYLOFD> Some sort of FAN waiting list?
[20:06] <@CavalierOne> 3
[20:06] <@Toprawa> They can sign a waiting list or something.
[20:06] <@ChackJadson> Meh...
[20:06] <@Toprawa> When one gets removed, the next one up goes on
[20:07] <@CC7567> Eh.
[20:07] <@CavalierOne> It would move some noms off the page entirely at this point.
[20:07] <@ChackJadson> I could go 4, but probably not 3
[20:07] <@CavalierOne> As I said, more of an idea rather than anything formal.
[20:07] <@CavalierOne> 4 could work.
[20:07] <@ChackJadson> Interesting idea though
[20:07] <@Toprawa> I strongly oppose limiting the number of required Inqvotes, I'm sorry
[20:07] <@Toprawa> lowering the number*, rather
[20:07] <@CavalierOne> But we have a lot of non-Inq voting going on. Maybe they could count towards a total.
[20:07] <@Toprawa> Even if it takes more time, it's worth it for the sake of quality
[20:07] <@Grunny> I think the FAN needs to have the oversight of 5 inqvotes
[20:07] <@Darth_Culator> Even at 5, crap still gets through.
[20:07] <@CC7567> Well, things like Calo Nord prove that even when 4 Inqs review it, it's not always perfect
[20:08] <@CC7567>
[20:08] <@Grunny> Another thought along these lines...
[20:08] <@Grunny> limiting the number of FANs one nominator can have up at a time
[20:08] <@Darth_Culator> This is why I'm always the last vote on any article I review. Just the number of simple spelling errors that get past 4 Inqs is often appalling.
[20:08] <@Toprawa> I like Grunny's idea /a lot/
[20:09] <@Grunny> I's prefer people to ensure the articles they have up get through before nominating more
[20:09] <@Darth_Culator> That, I can readily support.
[20:09] <@ChackJadson> I like that
[20:09] <@Toprawa> Yes
[20:09] <@ChackJadson> What would the limit be, any idea?
[20:09] <@CavalierOne> 3
[20:09] <@IFYLOFD> Well I have 6 noms on FAN at the moment.
[20:09] <@Darth_Culator> Particularly when the nominators are Inqs.
[20:09] <@Toprawa> 3 is good.
[20:09] <@IFYLOFD> So some of those would get cut out?
[20:09] <@CC7567> Hmm.
[20:09] <@ChackJadson> Well, no
[20:09] <@Grunny> it woudln't be retro-active
[20:09] <@Toprawa> We could grandfather this
[20:09] <@ChackJadson> I would make it start Jan 1 or soemthing
[20:09] <@Toprawa> Existing noms can stay
[20:09] <@Grunny> you just can't nominate more until you get the number down :P
[20:10] <@IFYLOFD> I don't think I like this idea.
[20:10] <@Grunny> it has the added advantage of giving Inqs more time to review rather than constantly writing
[20:10] <@ChackJadson> Let's vote
[20:10] <@ChackJadson> Limit is 3, ok?
[20:10] <@CC7567> I have to go with Floyd on this one just because it puts the nominator at fault instead of the reviewers (or lack thereof)
[20:10] <@IFYLOFD> I vote against it.
[20:10] <@ChackJadson> Vote for
[20:10] <@Toprawa> Support
[20:10] <@CavalierOne> Support, but wouldn't this type of change need to be CTed?
[20:11] <@ChackJadson> Ugh
[20:11] <@Darth_Culator> Feh.
[20:11] <@ChackJadson> It might...
[20:11] <@IFYLOFD> If someone is being productive and writing more articles than other nominators, why put the nominator at fault?
[20:11] <@CavalierOne> I mean, look at the crap we got when changing the GAN rules.
[20:11] <@Toprawa>  /And/ it leaves these people more time to review.
[20:11] <@Toprawa> Floyd, you can spend your newfound time reviewing noms instead of writing more
[20:11] <@ChackJadson> heh
[20:12] <@Toprawa> Why does it need a CT?
[20:12] <@Grunny> support
[20:12] <@Toprawa> We manage the FAN page.
[20:12] <@Toprawa> That's what the Inq exists for
[20:12] <@Grunny> the FAN is under the Inq's management
[20:13] <@CavalierOne> And the GAN page, but we got heat when he tried to enforce the word limit. Just pointing out that it might get called on.
[20:13] <@ChackJadson> if too many people bitch we can CT it later
[20:13] <@CavalierOne> Personally, I support it. Just playing devil's advocate :P
[20:13] <@CC7567> Eh.
[20:13] <@Toprawa> The word limit was restricting actual article content, though
[20:13] <@Toprawa> That's entirely different
[20:13] <@Toprawa> This is just what goes on the FAN page
[20:13] <@Grunny> exactly
[20:14] <@CC7567> I would personally feel better if there was at least an increase of reviewing to go with this new rule, as that's the real issue here
[20:14] <@CavalierOne> As I said, just pointing out a potential problem. But I support.
[20:14] <@ChackJadson> Who's to say there wouldn't be, CC?
[20:14] <@Toprawa> Well, that's what I believe should happen as a result, CC.
[20:14] <@Toprawa> Less article writing for Inqs should equal more reviewing time
[20:14] <@Toprawa> You're on this panel to review, not to write articles
[20:15] <@Toprawa> Let's just hold a final vote tally, yes?
[20:15] <@Grunny> support
[20:15] <@ChackJadson> For
[20:15] <@IFYLOFD> Oppose.
[20:15] <@Toprawa> Support
[20:15] <@Darth_Culator> Fore!
[20:16] <@CC7567> Abstain.
[20:16] <@CavalierOne> Support,
[20:16] <@CC7567> Actually, after more thought, support
[20:16] <@Grunny> okay, rule passed
[20:17] <@Grunny> Nominators are now limited to 3 FANs at a time
[20:17] <@Toprawa> One more thing.
[20:17] <@CC7567> Though I think this should be reviewed at the next meeting
[20:17] <@Toprawa> Oh, it is 3?
[20:17] <@Toprawa> Fine, then
[20:17] <@Toprawa> that was my question
[20:17] <@Grunny> this is not retro-active
[20:17] <@CC7567> Does this rule come into effect immediately or is there some sort of notice to all nominators?
[20:18] <@CavalierOne> I would give notice.
[20:18] <@Toprawa> We can place a new note on the FAN page.
[20:18] <@CC7567> Because while the FAN inactivity is obvious, this still comes as a bit of a surprise
[20:18] <@CavalierOne> Site notice as well.
[20:18] <@Grunny> yep
[20:18] <@ChackJadson> Maybe in big letters at the top of the FAN page
[20:19] <@ChackJadson> Anyway
[20:19] * @ChackJadson turn?
[20:19] <@Grunny> yep
[20:19] <@Toprawa> THANKS, MANAGEMENT
[20:19] <@CC7567> :P
[20:19] <@ChackJadson> lol
[20:19] <@Grunny> haha XD
[20:19] <@ChackJadson> Ok then
[20:19] <@CavalierOne> With block warnings.
[20:19] <@ChackJadson>
[20:19] <@CC7567> I have something minor after Chack
[20:19] <@ChackJadson> 'This featured article has been deemed sufficiently below FA standards by the Inquisitorius and will have its status removed if not up to standards in two weeks."
[20:19] <@ChackJadson> How about we change it to something like “if not up to standards by the next Inquisitorius meeting?”
[20:20] <@ChackJadson> We don’t wait 2 weeks, and never have.
[20:20] <@Darth_Culator> Yes, do that.
[20:20] <@ChackJadson> Like I said, real minor
[20:20] <@CC7567> Definitely.
[20:20] <@IFYLOFD> Yup.
[20:20] <@Grunny> yeah, do it
[20:20] <@CavalierOne> Indeed.
[20:20] <@ChackJadson> I can make the change if you want
[20:20] <@ChackJadson> Just to what I said above
[20:20] <@Darth_Culator> I'd expect you to, since it's your idea. :P
[20:20] <@ChackJadson> heh
[20:20] <@ChackJadson> Ok, motion passed?
[20:20] <@Darth_Culator> That's so minor I wouldn't have bothered asking.
[20:21] <@ChackJadson> Just checking
[20:21] <@ChackJadson> I guess CC can go

[Redacted the top-secret, cabalistic, horribly evil new-member induction tangent instigated by Brother Toprawa. It was brief. Very few chickens were sacrificed.]

[20:23] <@CC7567> Kay
[20:23] <@CC7567> Since we're all here, can we just vote off all the inactive objections on the FAN at once?
[20:24] <@Grunny> Certainly
[20:24] <@CC7567> The one that goes off the top of my head is Graestan's for Fang Zar
[20:24] <@CavalierOne> Which ones?
[20:24] <@Toprawa> yeah, which ones?
[20:24] <@Toprawa> how old is Graestan's?
[20:24] <@CC7567>
[20:24] <@CC7567> A few months, I believe
[20:25] <@Grunny> strike
[20:25] <@Toprawa> I vote to strike
[20:25] * @ChackJadson votes strike his objection
[20:25] <@IFYLOFD> Strike.
[20:25] <@CavalierOne> Strike
[20:25] <@Toprawa> Just as a note for the Inqs, Graestan's objections, which were addressed a day after their posting, have sat unstricken for a month now. Darth Trayus  (Trayus Academy) 05:20, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
[20:25] <@Toprawa> Someone should seriously tell him to come tell someone
[20:25] <@Toprawa> because we clearly don't monitor this stuff :P
[20:25] <@Grunny> yeah, and just a side note
[20:25] <@CC7567> Heh. :P
[20:25] <@Grunny> we currently format like this for votes to remove:
[20:26] <@Grunny> '''Vote to remove nomination (Inquisitorius only)'''
[20:26] <@Grunny> or whatever
[20:26] <@Grunny> can we change that to a section heading?
[20:26] <@Toprawa> Fine with me.
[20:26] <@Grunny> ===Vote to remove nomination (Inquisitorius only)===
[20:26] <@ChackJadson> Fine by me
[20:26] <@Toprawa> makes it easier to find
[20:26] <@CC7567> Sure.
[20:26] <@CavalierOne> Yep
[20:26] <@Grunny> because people often don't see the votes
[20:26] <@Grunny> and I think it's easier to see if it's a section
[20:27] <@Grunny> coolio
[20:27] <@Grunny> okay, so Grae's objection struck
[20:27] <@CC7567> Can't find any other inactive objections of note at the moment, so that's it for me
[20:27] <@Grunny> any other objections to strike CC?
[20:27] <@Grunny> anyone else?
[20:27] <@ChackJadson> All of his objections, right?
[20:27] <@CC7567> Yeah
[20:27] <@ChackJadson> K
[20:28] <@Darth_Culator> We already got all whatshername's. Naru's. Right?
[20:28] <@Grunny> yeah, I believe so
[20:28] <@CC7567> That's it, then
[20:28] <@Grunny> cool
[20:28] <@Grunny> MEETING ADJOURNED!
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Build A Star Wars Movie Collection