[19:03] <@CC7567> If not, then welcome to Inqmoot 34
[19:03] <@CC7567> !hieverybody
[19:03] <@Nuku-Nuku> Hello, CC7567, ChackJadson, ChanServ, Culator|Away, Darth_Burger, Graestan, GreenTentacle, GT|away, and Nuku-Nuku !!!
(Editor's note: Darth_Burger is Toprawa. :P )
[19:03] <@GreenTentacle> I'll have an idea to discuss at the end.
[19:04] <@Darth_Burger> Hi, Dr. Nick
[19:04] <@CC7567> First up is articles from last meeting
[19:04] <@CC7567>
[19:04] <@CC7567>
[19:04] <@Graestan> Now featuring over 75,000 more edits since last meeting :P
[19:05] <@Darth_Burger> Yeah, I have a bit with this one.
[19:05] <@GreenTentacle> Still waiting for changes to load...
[19:05] <@ChackJadson> Over 100+ KB, in case you don't want to look :P
[19:05] <@ChackJadson> Or can't
[19:05] * @GreenTentacle kicks the internet.
[19:05] <@Graestan> The expansion is vastly devoid of things like quotes and headings, on first look.
[19:05] <@Darth_Burger> I'm all for peace and free love and expanding your mind and all that gay hippy crap, but since when do we do "Aliases and nicknames" sections in character articles?
[19:06] <@Darth_Burger> To answer my own question, we don't.
[19:06] <@Darth_Burger> That needs to be moved into another section...or something
[19:06] <@GreenTentacle> Actually, I'm sure that was discussed in a CT ages ago.
[19:06] <@ChackJadson> CC: Fiolli voted keep, btw
[19:06] <@Graestan> Those can easily be dropped into the bio.
[19:06] <@GreenTentacle> Can't remember the outcome.
[19:06] <@ChackJadson> Or P&T
[19:07] <@Darth_Burger> I don't care where it goes
[19:07] <@Darth_Burger> but it needs to go somewhere
[19:07] <@Graestan> Indeed, per Chack. If he wants to make certain they are highlighted, they can be bolded or something in their mentions.
[19:07] <@Graestan> But the separate section is pretty extraneous.
[19:07] <@ChackJadson> I don't want to vote kill on it, but they do need to be moved
[19:07] * Eyrezer (~Eyrezer@[REDACTED]) has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius
[19:07] * ChanServ sets mode: +o Eyrezer
[19:07] * Nuku-Nuku sets mode: +o Eyrezer
[19:07] <@ChackJadson> Hey Ey
[19:07] <@Eyrezer> Hey
[19:08] <@Eyrezer> Just got in
[19:08] <@Darth_Burger> I'm sick of looking at the article every meeting.
[19:08] <@Darth_Burger> I'm voting kill.
[19:08] <@Eyrezer> Which article?
[19:08] <@Graestan> Too long, too lacking in its final version.
[19:08] <@ChackJadson> Jaina
[19:09] * @CC7567 (~chatzilla@wikia/CC7567) Quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
[19:09] <@Darth_Burger> There goes our glorious meeting leader.
[19:09] <@Darth_Burger> That's good news.
[19:09] <@Graestan> Damn peer.
[19:09] * IFYLOFD (~chatzilla@[REDACTED]) has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius
[19:09] * ChanServ sets mode: +o IFYLOFD
[19:09] * Nuku-Nuku sets mode: +o IFYLOFD
[19:09] <@Darth_Burger> This meeting is going swimmingly so far.
[19:09] <@IFYLOFD> Sorry I'm late, guys.
[19:09] <@ChackJadson> We're on Jaina
[19:09] <@ChackJadson> Anyway, I vote keep, but give Ataru a notice on the aliases
[19:10] <@ChackJadson> And if it comes up again, I won't be so nice
[19:10] * CC7567 (~chatzilla@wikia/CC7567) has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius
[19:10] * ChanServ sets mode: +o CC7567
[19:10] * Nuku-Nuku sets mode: +o CC7567
[19:10] <@Graestan> Kill, he can always renominate later.
[19:10] <@Eyrezer> I vote keep too.
[19:10] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:10] <@Eyrezer> Did Jon record a vote on it?
[19:10] <@GreenTentacle> Keep. Everything looks done.
[19:10] <@CC7567> I don't think any of the absentees besides Fiolli did
[19:10] <@Eyrezer> I know he's been discussing it on Ataru's page
[19:11] <@CC7567> For the record, I vote keep
[19:11] <@Eyrezer> Jon said on Ataru's page: Hey no problem, it's a big article with a lot of sections to go through; that's a lot of hard work. And very well done, too; I'd say the corrections look good.
[19:12] <@ChackJadson> Is that official thoughZ?
[19:12] <@CC7567> I doubt it
[19:12] <@Eyrezer> Nope
[19:13] <@ChackJadson> Oh, btw: are you all in favor of giving Ataru a message to fix the aliases stuff by incorporating it into the body or wherever?
[19:13] <@Eyrezer> Anyone tallying votes yet?
[19:13] <@CC7567> 2 to 6, I believe, including Fiolli
[19:14] <@Graestan> Close vote, move on!
[19:14] <@CC7567> Jaina Solo kept
[19:14] <@CC7567>
[19:14] <@CC7567>
[19:15] <@CC7567> Updated by Tope, apparently
[19:15] <@Darth_Burger> Apparently
[19:15] <@IFYLOFD> Looks good.
[19:15] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:15] <@CC7567> I vote keep
[19:15] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:15] <@Darth_Burger> KILL
[19:15] <@GreenTentacle> Keep. Though I still say his twin in Rebel Assault should be mentioned in BTS. :P
[19:15] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:15] <@Darth_Burger> He has a twin?
[19:16] <@CC7567> Beryl Chiffonage kept
[19:16] <@CC7567>
[19:16] <@CC7567>
[19:16] <@GreenTentacle> Ah, sorry. Wrong Echo Base guy.
[19:16] <@GreenTentacle> Thinking of Navander.
[19:16] <@ChackJadson> Kill
[19:16] <@Darth_Burger> four military jets just flew over my house in strafing formation
[19:16] <@Darth_Burger> is that a bad thing?
[19:16] <@CC7567> Hardly any work, so kill
[19:16] <@IFYLOFD> Probably
[19:16] <@IFYLOFD> Kill.
[19:17] <@GreenTentacle> Kill.
[19:17] <@Darth_Burger> Kill
[19:17] <@CC7567> Carnor Jax killed
[19:17] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:17] <@CC7567>
[19:17] <@CC7567> Tommy got this one
[19:17] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:17] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:17] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:18] <@CC7567> Anyone else?
[19:18] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:18] <@Darth_Burger> All that {{Clear}} white space kind of hurts my eyes, but whatever
[19:18] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:18] <@Darth_Burger> Keep
[19:18] <@CC7567> Great Sith War kept
[19:18] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:18] <@IFYLOFD> Tope, you're a Midwesterner, are they still rioting about LeBron up there?
[19:18] <@Eyrezer> Although it would benefit from some Atlas images in there
[19:18] <@CC7567>
[19:18] <@Darth_Burger> No one in Chicago gives a shit about LeBron
[19:18] <@Eyrezer> I took care of Moorja
[19:18] <@GreenTentacle> Darth_Burger: The giant pictures are more annoying. :P
[19:18] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:18] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:19] <@CC7567> Ahem.
[19:19] <@CC7567> Anyone else?
[19:19] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:19] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:19] <@CC7567> Moorja kept
[19:19] <@CC7567> Next up:
[19:19] <@CC7567>
[19:19] <@CC7567>
[19:20] <@CC7567> Updated, so keep
[19:20] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:20] * IFYLOFD is now known as LeBronadictArnol
[19:20] <@Eyrezer> Cool; keep
[19:20] <@LeBronadictArnol> Crap.
[19:20] * LeBronadictArnol is now known as IFYLOFD
[19:20] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:20] <@ChackJadson> lol, Floyd
[19:20] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:20] <@Graestan> Now is not the time, Fjord. :P
[19:20] <@CC7567> Telos IV kept
[19:20] <@Graestan> Keep.
[19:20] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:20] <@CC7567>
[19:21] <@CC7567>
[19:21] <@Darth_Burger> KEEP
[19:21] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:21] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:21] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:21] <@Culator|Away> Jeep.
[19:21] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:21] <@CC7567> Hoth kept
[19:21] <@CC7567>
[19:21] <@CC7567>
[19:21] <@CC7567>
[19:22] <@CC7567> I vote keep
[19:22] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:22] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:22] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:22] <@CC7567> Hallis Saper kept
[19:22] <@CC7567> Last one is
[19:23] <@CC7567>
[19:23] <@CC7567>
[19:23] <@CC7567> Still missing a lot, so kill
[19:23] <@Darth_Burger> The BTS is hilariously awful
[19:23] <@IFYLOFD> Killify.
[19:23] <@Graestan> Keel.
[19:23] <@Darth_Burger> Kill
[19:23] <@ChackJadson> Kill
[19:23] <@IFYLOFD> It's just been revoked!
[19:23] <@GreenTentacle> Kill.
[19:23] <@Eyrezer> Killith
[19:23] <@CC7567> Kir Kanos killed
[19:23] <@CC7567> And now we go onto new articles for probation
[19:24] <@CC7567> First up is
[19:24] <@Darth_Burger> I also enjoy the "Final fate" section title
[19:24] <@Darth_Burger> Is there a non-final fate?
[19:24] <@IFYLOFD> "Temporary fate"
[19:24] <@Eyrezer> Leia's fate in Tilotny throws a Shape?
[19:25] <@Culator|Away> ANYWAY
[19:25] <@Darth_Burger> Why is there so much speculation in this article?
[19:25] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:25] <@CC7567> "Fate is unknown" stuff in Shelvay, according to Chack
[19:25] <@CC7567> I vote prob
[19:25] <@Darth_Burger> "He may have even trained students of his own in the ways of the Force."
[19:25] <@CC7567> e
[19:25] <@Darth_Burger> "Shelvay may have gone on to train other Force-users. It is possible that he reconciled with his sister and taught her the ways of the Force."
[19:25] <@ChackJadson> Poor linking
[19:25] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:25] <@Darth_Burger> Are these actual things?
[19:25] <@Graestan> Probationarify.
[19:25] <@Darth_Burger> Probe
[19:26] <@Eyrezer> Probe
[19:26] <@CC7567> Corwin Shelvay probed
[19:26] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:26] <@GreenTentacle> The speculation has a reference explaining it.
[19:26] <@CC7567> Minor {{Quote}} discrepancy, fixed now
[19:26] <@Culator|Away> That was a template implementation bug. She's fine.
[19:26] <@GreenTentacle> Though I guess it's still speculation.
[19:26] <@CC7567> I vote keep
[19:26] <@Darth_Burger> GT> Indeed
[19:26] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:26] <@Darth_Burger> Keep
[19:26] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:26] <@Culator|Away> Though I wouldn't mind probing her anyway.
[19:26] * @Culator|Away has made the requisite probe joke.
[19:26] <@CC7567> Aeron Azzameen kept
[19:26] <@Darth_Burger> Good work.
[19:26] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:26] <@Darth_Burger> This meeting is now COMPLETE
[19:27] <@Eyrezer> GT --> WOuld be better just to be in the BTS
[19:27] <@GreenTentacle> Yeah, or that.
[19:27] <@CC7567> Back to Farlander: same story as with Azzameen, so I vote keep
[19:27] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:27] <@Culator|Away> Also a fixed bug, also keep.
[19:27] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:28] <@Darth_Burger> Keep
[19:28] <@CC7567> Keyan Farlander kept
[19:28] <@Graestan> Keeup.
[19:28] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:28] <@CC7567> Eyrezer took care of the update
[19:28] <@GreenTentacle> That scroll in the infobox is ugly.
[19:28] <@GreenTentacle> But keep.
[19:28] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:28] <@Eyrezer> Heh
[19:28] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:28] <@Graestan> Keep; can someone figure out if we can give the scroll that grey color?
[19:29] <@Graestan> GT? Maybe Grunny?
[19:29] <@Culator|Away> Probably.
[19:29] <@Eyrezer> I asked Grunny about that. Apparently it just detest <tr> or something so does it automatically
[19:29] <@GreenTentacle> Should be possible. I'll have a look.
[19:29] <@ChackJadson> Off-topic, could we just remove it? Please?
[19:29] <@ChackJadson> Gray would help, 
[19:29] <@Darth_Burger> I have no problem with the scrollbox 
[19:29] * @Eyrezer shrugs
[19:30] <@ChackJadson> I say keep, btw
[19:30] <@CC7567> Atrivis sector kept, then
[19:30] <@CC7567> Onto
[19:30] <@CC7567> Update needed, so I vote probe
[19:30] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:30] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:30] <@Graestan> JCW doesn't seem to have Atlas info
[19:30] <@Darth_Burger> Probe
[19:30] <@Graestan> And the Atlas has a decent amount of info
[19:30] <@GreenTentacle> Probify.
[19:30] <@Graestan> Definitely probe
[19:30] <@CC7567> Jedi Civil War probed
[19:31] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:31] <@CC7567> Same story with the update
[19:31] <@Graestan> Indeed
[19:31] <@ChackJadson> Probe
[19:31] <@Graestan> Probariiiiiiiitate.
[19:31] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:31] <@GreenTentacle> Probing Isard is a scary thought.
[19:31] <@CC7567> Probe
[19:31] <@CC7567> GT: hear, hear :P
[19:31] <@Darth_Burger> MERCY
[19:32] <@CC7567> It looks like there may be more updates needed (Xicer pointed one out in the edit history), so that needs to be looked into too
[19:32] <@CC7567> Wait, nevermind, it was the same one (I think)
[19:32] <@CC7567> Anyway, Ysanne Isard probedf
[19:32] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:32] <@CC7567> Undercity sewers - poor linking, some minor POV present, incorrect layout per the LG, speculation. Jonjedigrandmaster  (Talk)  21:45, June 19, 2010 (UTC) 
[19:33] <@Graestan> Yeah,it needs an overhaul.
[19:33] <@Graestan> It's like a Goodwood-era article.
[19:33] <@CC7567> Imp appears to have taken care of those concerns, and Jon said: "Looks like everything's been taken care of. Jonjedigrandmaster  (Talk)  17:13, June 25, 2010 (UTC) "
[19:33] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:33] <@Graestan> Someone needs to plow through it that knows the game well.
[19:33] <@Graestan> And I mean really well.
[19:33] <@CC7567> Anyone here familiar with KOTOR, then?
[19:33] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:33] <@Eyrezer> The intro could be expanded a bit too, I would think
[19:33] <@Graestan> I know someone, but I don't know if I can get her on it.
[19:33] <@GreenTentacle> Imp knows the game and he wrote it.
[19:34] <@Eyrezer> Possibly also a BTS expansion...
[19:34] <@CC7567> I vote probe on those concerns, then
[19:34] <@GreenTentacle> We can't probe on possibly needing an expansion.
[19:34] <@CC7567> Anyone else?
[19:34] <@Darth_Burger> Intro expansion too!
[19:34] <@Eyrezer> Give it a probe for a chance to polish
[19:34] <@Darth_Burger> PROBE
[19:34] <@ChackJadson> Probe, per them
[19:34] <@GreenTentacle> Feh.
[19:35] <@ChackJadson> esp. just for general cleaning
[19:35] <@Darth_Burger> Four-sentence intros kind of rub me the wrong way.
[19:35] <@CC7567> Undercity sewers probed
[19:35] <@GreenTentacle> Sewers just aren't that interesting. :P
[19:35] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:35] <@CC7567> Jon raised a concern for the lack of a P&A but Tommy took care of it
[19:35] <@CC7567> *Jon and Xicer
[19:35] <@Graestan> Keep; Tommy got it.
[19:35] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:36] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:36] <@CC7567> Wait no, just Xicer
[19:36] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:36] <@IFYLOFD> One of my first FAs. Keep.
[19:36] <@CC7567> Keep
[19:36] <@IFYLOFD> Seems like forever ago when I wrote it
[19:36] <@CC7567> Nelani Dinn kept
[19:36] * Fiolli (~Fiolli@wikia/Jedimasterfiolli) has joined #wookieepedia-inquisitorius
[19:36] * ChanServ sets mode: +o Fiolli
[19:36] * Nuku-Nuku sets mode: +o Fiolli
[19:36] <@Darth_Burger> KEEP
[19:36] <@ChackJadson> Fiolli!
[19:36] <@Culator|Away> BEEP
[19:36] <@Graestan> LASAGNA
[19:36] <@Fiolli> Hey, all. Sorry I'm late.
[19:36] <@IFYLOFD> Folffles!
[19:36] <@CC7567> Welcome, Fiolli
[19:36] <@CC7567> We're on new articles right now
[19:36] <@CC7567> Current one is
[19:36] <@Fiolli> Ok.
[19:37] <@CC7567> Atton Rand - redlink in the infobox, and the intro is missing a ton of info from his time with the Exile. Jonjedigrandmaster  (Talk)  02:19, June 25, 2010 (UTC) 
[19:37] <@CC7567> Naru says he took care of it
[19:37] <@Darth_Burger> Forgive me if I don't put much credit in Naru's claim.
[19:37] <@Darth_Burger> Can someone else weigh in?
[19:37] <@Culator|Away> Urgh. Intro is the least important part of the article.
[19:37] <@CC7567>, for reference, is most of Naru's work
[19:37] <@Eyrezer> Could do with an external link to CUSWE, but Keep
[19:37] <@ChackJadson> KOTOR expert? :P
[19:37] <@Graestan> I don't get what we do about the time with the Exile if so much of it is RPG
[19:37] <@IFYLOFD> Looks taken care of
[19:38] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:38] <@Fiolli> I guess it is ok... I guess...
[19:38] <@GreenTentacle> Looks alright to me. Keep.
[19:38] <@CC7567> Keep, unless anyone has specific concerns
[19:39] <@CC7567> If not, then Atton Rand is kept
[19:39] <@Culator|Away> Meh!
[19:39] <@CC7567> Now onto the glorious TCW Character Encyclopedia update articles.
[19:39] <@ChackJadson> !
[19:39] <@CC7567> First is
[19:39] <@Eyrezer> brb
[19:39] <@GreenTentacle> Glorious and TCW do not belong in the same sentence.
[19:39] <@CC7567> Trayus took care of the info and the last name fixes concern that Toprawa raised, and I can personally vouch for it
[19:40] <@CC7567> I vote keep
[19:40] <@Darth_Burger> Keep
[19:40] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:40] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:40] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:40] <@GreenTentacle> Though again with the giant images.
[19:40] <@Graestan> Kerp.
[19:40] <@CC7567> Wait, hang on
[19:40] <@CC7567> Nevermind, everything's good
[19:41] <@CC7567> Suu Lawquane kept
[19:41] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:41] <@CC7567> Update purged, so keep
[19:41] <@Darth_Burger> KEEP
[19:41] <@GreenTentacle> We're gonna go over the struck ones? o_O
[19:41] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:41] <@IFYLOFD> Creep.
[19:41] <@CC7567> GT: to make everyone happy :P
[19:41] <@GreenTentacle> I'm gonna need some coffee. :P
[19:42] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:42] <@Eyrezer> Keep
[19:42] <@CC7567> Boil kept
[19:42] <@Graestan> Kerp.
[19:42] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:42] <@CC7567> Wait.
[19:42] <@CC7567> :|
[19:42] <@CC7567> That was a bad fail.
[19:42] <@CC7567> Next up is
[19:42] <@CC7567> Update taken care of, so I vote keep
[19:42] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:42] <@Fiolli> Keep
[19:42] <@Darth_Burger> PURPLE NURPLE
[19:42] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:42] <@ChackJadson> I trust his judgment. You should too :P
[19:43] <@GreenTentacle> I will defer to our resident TCW expert on all of these.
[19:43] <@Eyrezer> That's a great infobox pic... Keep
[19:43] <@CC7567> Bolla Ropal kept
[19:43] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:43] <@CC7567> Next is
[19:43] <@CC7567> I vote keep.
[19:43] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:43] <@IFYLOFD> Keep.
[19:43] <@Graestan> Koop.
[19:43] <@GreenTentacle> Keep.
[19:43] <@Fiolli> Keep
[19:43] <@Darth_Burger> are there any you don't vote keep on, CC?
[19:43] <@Darth_Burger> maybe that would be a more efficient way of doing this
[19:44] <@Darth_Burger> I trust your judgment, personally
[19:44] <@CC7567> CC-3636 kept
[19:44] <@CC7567> Yes, actually, there is one
[19:44] <@Fiolli> Was CT-26-999999999999999999 taken care of?
[19:44] <@GreenTentacle> I like that idea.
[19:44] <@Fiolli> *1409
[19:44] <@CC7567> He's now CT-21-0408, but yes :P
[19:45] <@CC7567> Well, if everyone wants to skip those that have been updated (which I can all vouch for), I'm fine with that
[19:45] <@GreenTentacle> YES!
[19:45] <@CC7567> If not, we can just go through them all one by one to be safe
[19:45] <@Eyrezer> Yep
[19:46] <@IFYLOFD> Yup.
[19:46] <@Fiolli> uh-huh
[19:46] <@Graestan> skip
[19:46] <@Darth_Burger> DO
[19:46] <@CC7567> Okay
[19:46] <@CC7567> The only one which has not been updated is
[19:46] <@Graestan> Probe it!
[19:46] <@CC7567> And I also raised a concern about the lack of an Equipment seciton
[19:47] <@CC7567> *section
[19:47] <@Fiolli> Probe
[19:47] <@Darth_Burger> PURPLE NURPLE
[19:47] <@Darth_Burger> (Edit: Link redacted due to spam filter.)
[19:47] <@IFYLOFD> Best. Hairstyle. Ever.
[19:47] <@CC7567> I vote probe
[19:47] <@GreenTentacle> Probe the clone.
[19:47] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:47] <@ChackJadson> Tope, on topic please, dear boy?
[19:47] <@Darth_Burger> I am on topic, sweety 
[19:47] <@CC7567> 9_9
[19:47] <@CC7567> CC-1004 kept
[19:47] <@Darth_Burger> sweetie?*
[19:47] <@CC7567> Wait, *probed
[19:47] <@CC7567> Sorry about that
[19:48] <@Graestan> XD
[19:48] <@Fiolli> XD
[19:48] <@Darth_Burger> You must learn to decipher my probificationment
[19:48] <@IFYLOFD> lolz
[19:48] <@CC7567> is next
[19:48] <@CC7567> Update tag, so I vote probe
[19:48] <@Fiolli> Probe
[19:48] <@GreenTentacle> Probe.
[19:48] <@Graestan> Indeedy do
[19:48] <@Darth_Burger> PROBE
[19:48] <@IFYLOFD> Probe.
[19:49] <@Eyrezer> Probe
[19:49] <@CC7567> Seha Dorvald probed
[19:49] <@CC7567> Last one on the page is
[19:49] <@ChackJadson> Keep
[19:49] <@Fiolli> Keep
[19:49] <@CC7567> For the record: Young-Elders War  -  My first (and still only) FA, and I'm having second thoughts about it. Specifically, after looking through other FAs, the intro seems to be way too short to me. However, I don't even pretend to be an expert on appropriate intro size, plus it passed the review of five Inqs on FAN in literally the exact state it's in now, so I'm hesitant to expand the intro...
[19:49] <@CC7567> ...without guidance from the Inq first. At any rate, I'd like the Inqs to look at it, let me know what you think, and probe if you feel it necessary. Thanks in advance.  - Master Jonathan   (Jedi Council Chambers) 23:48, July 4, 2010 (UTC) 
[19:49] <@Eyrezer> The intro /could/ do with an expansion
[19:49] <@Darth_Burger> Probe, per intro expansion
[19:49] <@GreenTentacle> Hardly probe worthy.
[19:49] <@GreenTentacle> He can just fix it anytime.
[19:50] <@IFYLOFD> Intro could definitely be expanded. Probe.
[19:50] <@Darth_Burger> If the nominator says so, that's good enough for me
[19:50] <@Graestan> Okily dokily
[19:50] <@GreenTentacle> He could have expanded it in the time it took to complain about it. :P
[19:50] <@Eyrezer> Lol
[19:50] <@Graestan> He learned from the best
[19:50] <@ChackJadson> lol
[19:51] <@Graestan> We've been doing it that way for five years!
[19:51] <@ChackJadson> Watergate, punk rock!
[19:51] <@CC7567> I vote probe, for the record
[19:51] <@CC7567> Anyone else?
[19:51] <@Graestan> Probe.
[19:51] <@Eyrezer> Probe for intro from me
[19:51] <@GreenTentacle> Meh.
[19:51] <@Fiolli> abstain
[19:51] <@Darth_Burger> NEUTRALITY IS DEATH, FIOLLI!
[19:52] <@ChackJadson> We didn't start the fire!@
[19:52] <@Graestan> Props to Watson for being too lazy to name groups of people.
[19:52] <@GreenTentacle> NEUTRALITY IS SWISS, FIOLLI!
[19:52] <@Fiolli> I'm lactose intolerant.
[19:52] <@CC7567> 5 probe, 1 keep, and 1 abstain
[19:52] <@Graestan> Abstinence is the only safe Inqvote!
[19:52] <@CC7567> Young-Elders War probed
[19:52] <@CC7567> (though I'm giving up on the count)
[19:52] <@ChackJadson> Joey Switzerland!
[19:52] <@Darth_Burger> Abstinence is the only safe life choice.
[19:53] <@CC7567> Okay, anyone have any other articles of concern that we should review?
[19:53] <@ChackJadson> Yes
[19:53] <@ChackJadson> Cad Bane
[19:53] <@CC7567> :|
[19:53] <@ChackJadson> :P
[19:53] <@CC7567> Not what I meant :P
[19:53] <@IFYLOFD> Yo momma
[19:53] <@ChackJadson> Ok, I think we can move on
[19:53] <@Fiolli> Actually, I am concerned with Cad Bane.
[19:54] <@CC7567> If there aren't any other articles, then we move onto the discussion section
[19:54] <@Fiolli> ;)
[19:54] <@CC7567> He's a GA, not an FA :P
[19:54] <@Darth_Burger> Cad Bane isn't even an FA.
[19:54] <@Darth_Burger> What he said
[19:54] <@Fiolli> Exactly. That's why I'm concerned.
[19:54] <@CC7567> 9_9
[19:54] <@ChackJadson> That's the joke! :D
[19:54] <@CC7567> Order! Order!
[19:54] <@CC7567> Anyway, the first topic of business is the GA proposal that we discussed the last meeting
[19:54] <@Culator|Away> Yes!
[19:54] <@Graestan> I ob-a-ject!
[19:55] <@Graestan> I think the nomination process can be utilized just fine. But my ears are open.
[19:55] <@Darth_Burger> These pretzels are making me thirsty 
[19:55] <@CC7567> To refresh everyone's memory, it was proposed that we somehow implement some sort of system that allows GAs over 1,000 words to be promoted to FA
[19:55] <@CC7567> So...
[19:55] <@CC7567> I went through all the GAs and found that there are about 75 GAs over 1,000 words
[19:55] <@CC7567> That was a few weeks ago, so one or two may have popped up since then
[19:55] <@Darth_Burger> TACK EM ON THE FAN PAGE
[19:55] <@ChackJadson> No, Burger, now is not the time
[19:55] <@GreenTentacle> ...
[19:56] <@Darth_Burger> WHAT'S 75 MORE NOMS?!
[19:56] <@GreenTentacle> You need a hobby.
[19:56] <@GreenTentacle> :P
[19:56] <@CC7567> I have the document, if anyone wants to see it later
[19:56] <@ChackJadson> Me
[19:56] <@GreenTentacle> Darth_Burger: One of those is Lando, you know. :P
[19:56] <@Graestan> My concern is that long GAs were held to a lower standard than FAs for a long time.
[19:56] <@CC7567> Yes, exactly
[19:56] <@Fiolli> Please refresh me on how this would work. I'm open to entertaining this, but I'm not sure I want a blanket long-running idea.
[19:56] <@Darth_Burger> Well, I didn't say /I/ would be reading them :P
[19:56] * ChackJadson is now known as OptimusRhyme
[19:56] <@Graestan> They only needed complete coverage, not comprehensive./
[19:57] <@CC7567> Let me finish
[19:57] <@CC7567> So after I compiled the info, I got to brainstorming, and I had an idae
[19:57] <@CC7567> *idea
[19:57] <@CC7567> Because of the recent change to the FAN voting process with the implementation of user votes, some of the GAs technically already received the designated votes during the GAN process
[19:58] <@CC7567> Take, for example
[19:58] <@Graestan> :S
[19:58] <@CC7567> Just hear me out :P
[19:58] <@Graestan> Okay, sorry
[19:58] <@Eyrezer> Listening..
[19:58] <@CC7567> Technically, the article received 3 votes from current Inqs and 5 user votes, which would have made it an FA had it been on the FAN
[19:59] <@CC7567> And it has no major changes since it became a GA
[19:59] <@CC7567> (like updates that might require scrutinized reviewing)
[19:59] <@Darth_Burger> This is assuming that everyone who voted on it gives it the same inspection they would for an FAN
[20:00] <@CC7567> Yes, that is a concern
[20:00] <@CC7567> Out of the 75 over-1,000-word GAs, only about five met the required FAN votes (from current Inqs) and have no major changes since they were last reviewed
[20:00] <@Darth_Burger> People have admitted in the past they don't look at GANs as closely
[20:00] <@OptimusRhyme> I think that's changing though
[20:00] <@GreenTentacle> I can think of one problem...
[20:00] <@OptimusRhyme> I know I, as an AC, read both equally
[20:00] <@Darth_Burger> Are you sure those are truly FAN eligible, though?
[20:00] <@Darth_Burger> Are you sure they're comprehensive, I mean?
[20:00] <@GreenTentacle> People could nominate articles for GA to get around the FAN limit.
[20:00] <@Eyrezer> I know of a few WP:AS GAs over 1k that I would feel comfortable progressing to FA as they currently are.
[20:01] <@OptimusRhyme> Well, in theory, aren't GAs just short FAs now?
[20:01] <@GreenTentacle> Not the long ones.
[20:01] <@GreenTentacle> They don't have to be complete.
[20:01] <@CC7567> Okay, to clarify, this proposal only refers to /current/ GAs, not others that will pass later
[20:01] <@CC7567> So my proposal for these specific articles is that we vote them in as FAs
[20:01] <@GreenTentacle> Ah, alright then.
[20:01] <@IFYLOFD> Blerg.
[20:01] <@OptimusRhyme> GT: long FAs or GAs?
[20:02] <@GreenTentacle> Long GAs.
[20:02] <@GreenTentacle> All FAs have to be complete.
[20:02] <@Darth_Burger> Wait a second.
[20:02] <@CC7567> I'll save the issues of the other long GAs after we come to a decision on this one
[20:02] <@Darth_Burger> per GT
[20:02] <@Darth_Burger> "…have significant information, especially a biography for character articles. For articles under 1000 words in length, comprehensive detail is required with all information covered from all sources and appearances. For articles over 1000 words, broad coverage addressing all major aspects of the topic is sufficient."
[20:02] <@Graestan> Yeah
[20:02] <@Darth_Burger> This is the GAN nom wording ^
[20:02] <@Darth_Burger> CC, do you know for a fact that these 1000+ GAs are comprehensive and not just generally covered?
[20:02] <@CC7567> No, I don't, so that's the main concern here
[20:03] <@Darth_Burger> I don't either, and I'm willing to bet they're not, which is why they're GAs in the first place
[20:03] <@Darth_Burger> Maybe there are exceptions, but that's probably not the case for most of them
[20:03] <@CC7567> So shall we hold a vote on whether to develop a system to promote these five-or-so long GAs to FAs, the ones that have secured the adequate amount of votes?
[20:03] <@Darth_Burger> There was a time when it was kosher to write a half-assed would-be FA and then just dump it off on GAN
[20:03] <@Darth_Burger> These are those articles, I believe
[20:04] <@CC7567> Oh, I forgot one bit of info
[20:04] <@Fiolli> Not all, because the GAs I've written (even the couple that have popped over 1,000 words) have all been written to be FA standard. It depends on the user.
[20:04] <@CC7567> The oldest of these five-or-so articles is from March of last year
[20:04] <@CC7567> That may make a difference, but it's debatable
[20:04] <@OptimusRhyme> Per Fiolli
[20:05] <@Darth_Burger> Well, this is something that seems like we would need to go through one article at a time.
[20:05] <@Darth_Burger> I would not support one massive vote overhaul for every one
[20:05] <@Eyrezer> CC - I'd be interested in looking at promoting some recent GAs, but there was definitely a lower standard some time back
[20:05] <@GreenTentacle> Which we may as well do on the FAN page...
[20:05] <@CC7567> If that's the case, Tope, then I don't think the system is worth developing
[20:06] <@CC7567> So let's vote on the system, to make the decision official
[20:06] <@CC7567> (unless anyone has any other concerns they want to raise)
[20:06] <@CC7567> Again, this is regarding the few long GAs that have secured the right amount of votes
[20:06] <@Graestan> I vote no, let the nomination process reflect the more stringent requirements on articles of FA length.
[20:06] <@CC7567> I vote against, because you people convinced me :P
[20:06] <@GreenTentacle> Per Grae.
[20:06] <@OptimusRhyme> Per Grae
[20:06] <@Darth_Burger> per Grae
[20:06] <@OptimusRhyme> The nominator can FA them, of course
[20:06] <@CC7567> Okay
[20:07] <@Culator|Away> This whole thing was my idea in the first place, and it seems less and less good as it progresses.
[20:07] <@CC7567> Now that that has been taken care of, the issue moves to basically all of the long GAs
[20:07] <@Eyrezer> :P
[20:07] <@Darth_Burger> Perhaps we can send messages to original nominators explaining and encouraging them to work on the articles and potentially take them to FAN.
[20:07] <@CC7567> Yes, exactly
[20:07] <@Culator|Away> I think that's going to be the best option.
[20:07] <@CC7567> I have the list, and it can be used to do that
[20:07] <@GreenTentacle> That sounds like a good idea.
[20:07] <@Fiolli> I'm not completely opposed to doing this, if we go article by article and only for those that have a potential for advancement. I do see a few flaws: I don't trust the ability of some users to have attempted to reach FA quality on a GA. I also am concerned about the anti-Inq sentiment that a few users have and how we might be perceived by "fast-tracking" articles, especially seeing as our...
[20:07] <@Fiolli> ...articles are the most likely to advance. I also am concerned that this would set a precedent for the future, and should membership in either organization (Inq or AC) change, standards might change.
[20:08] <@CC7567> Is this for the current concern, Fiolli?
[20:08] <@Fiolli> For moving things up to FA from GA.
[20:08] <@Graestan> I believe I speak for many when I say that I don't care what people's sentiments are about the Inq.
[20:09] <@Graestan> Our work is important and their feelings take a backseat to it.
[20:09] <@Fiolli> I simply do not want to incite more problems than we already have.
[20:09] <@Darth_Burger> I care what people think about me.
[20:09] <@Darth_Burger> I'm self-conscious :P
[20:09] <@OptimusRhyme> You are not :P
[20:09] <@Graestan> XD
[20:09] <@Culator|Away> See, this is why every Hitler needs a Goebbels.
[20:09] <@Eyrezer> It's not an irrelevant concern. It's part of the reason why we eliminated Inqs voting for their own noms
[20:09] <@Graestan> We don't have problems. People make their little comments because it's their only way of getting their ideas across since they can't make it work democratically.
[20:10] <@CC7567> So anyway.
[20:10] <@CC7567> We just need to develop a specific message/template for asking users to work on their long GAs and nominate them to the FAN if we decide to do so
[20:10] <@CC7567> Is anyone willing to work on this?
[20:10] <@GreenTentacle> !youdoit
[20:10] <@Nuku-Nuku> Culator|Away should do it.
[20:10] <@OptimusRhyme> heh
[20:10] <@Culator|Away> How apropos.
[20:10] <@Graestan> You volunteered yourself, CC. :P
[20:10] <@CC7567> 9_9
[20:10] <@Darth_Burger> I don't mind typing out the message.
[20:11] <@Darth_Burger> But I might let CC paste it on everyone's talk pages :P
[20:11] <@CC7567> :P
[20:11] <@Culator|Away> I can whip up a template. It's basically just customizing one of the vandalism warnings, or something.
[20:11] <@CC7567> Culator: you're welcome to do it, then
[20:11] <@CC7567> And once that is developed, we can start sending it to users
[20:11] <@Darth_Burger> It needs an amusing picture, of course.
[20:11] <@Graestan> And a quote.
[20:11] <@CC7567> Do we want to wait till the next meeting to start sending messages to users so that we have time to look at the template after it is developed?
[20:12] <@Fiolli> That's a good idea.
[20:12] <@Darth_Burger> "Pick up the slack, meatbag!"
[20:12] <@CC7567> No :P
[20:12] <@CC7567> That's rude :P
[20:12] <@Fiolli> That's not a good idea.
[20:12] <@GreenTentacle> I like it. :P
[20:12] <@CC7567> I'm for waiting for the template to be developed before we do anything else
[20:12] <@Darth_Burger> I trust whatever template is created
[20:12] <@Darth_Burger> I think we can start asap
[20:13] <@CC7567> Anyone else?
[20:13] <@GreenTentacle> Per the beefy Sith.
[20:13] <@Darth_Burger> Do we really need to vote on the template?
[20:13] <@Darth_Burger> It's a one-time thing, really
[20:13] <@Graestan> I support the meatbag comment.
[20:13] <@CC7567> Okay
[20:13] <@Eyrezer> Against the meetbag comment
[20:13] <@CC7567> So 2 for waiting, and 3 or so for doing so immediately
[20:13] <@OptimusRhyme> Yako
[20:13] <@OptimusRhyme> Do it
[20:13] <@CC7567> Okay, 4 :P
[20:13] <@Eyrezer> But I am happy to otherwise implement before the next meeting
[20:14] <@CC7567> So per the majority, we will develop a template for encouraging users to promote their long GAs to FAs, and we will start implementing it as soon as possible
[20:14] <@GreenTentacle> Huzzah!
[20:14] <@CC7567> And anyone who wants to be involved with the template development can go harass Culator :P
[20:14] <@Darth_Burger> For the record, the meatbag quote was meant as a joke
[20:14] <@Darth_Burger> But I'm glad to see it gained some support :P
[20:15] <@CC7567> Anyone else have anything they want to discuss regarding this decision?
[20:15] <@Eyrezer> ;)
[20:15] <@CC7567> Okay
[20:15] <@CC7567> Moving onto the next order of business
[20:15] <@CC7567> Friendly suggestion: as mentioned here, the somewhat forgotten Featured article tutorials are only open for Inqs to write. That doesn't seem very productive, especially given that so few Inqs seem to want to write or finish one. Allowing non Inquisitors who are otherwise qualified to submit their own tutorials, while probably not exactly revitalizing the tutorial concept, is surely more...
[20:15] <@CC7567> ...productive. -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 11:17, July 1, 2010 (UTC) 
[20:16] <@Graestan> I think Acky should go for it.
[20:16] <@CC7567> Who exactly began the FA tutorial system? Does anyone know?
[20:16] <@Eyrezer> 4Dot started it
[20:16] <@Darth_Burger> I vote we do away with the Inq tutorial system to begin with :P
[20:16] <@Graestan> Nothing bars him from being bold.
[20:16] <@GreenTentacle> 4dot's idea, I believe.
[20:16] <@OptimusRhyme> Per Tope!
[20:16] <@CC7567> Was it adopted through the Inq?
[20:16] <@Darth_Burger> I think I can honestly say I'm never going to finish mine.
[20:16] <@GreenTentacle> Yes.
[20:16] <@Eyrezer> Fiolli - weren't you going to write a grammar tutorial? :P
[20:16] <@CC7567> Okay, so we currently operate the FA tutorial system
[20:16] <@CC7567> (for clarification)
[20:17] <@Graestan> MJ can write a comma tutorial
[20:17] <@Graestan> Everyone can write one
[20:17] <@OptimusRhyme> ...
[20:17] <@Graestan> They are essays so no one stops them
[20:17] <@IFYLOFD> I can write a you momma tutorial
[20:17] <@CC7567> Since this issue is pretty basic, can we hold Acky's proposal to a vote?
[20:17] <@Eyrezer> "Operate" is a bit of a stretch. Once upon a time, the idea was to have a tute for different types of articles and people volunteered to write them on certain areas. Most, just, never got around to it, I guess
[20:17] <@IFYLOFD> *yo
[20:17] <@GreenTentacle> Capitalisation of ranks and why the MOS is wrong. :P
[20:17] <@OptimusRhyme> Ok, vote
[20:18] <@Darth_Burger> So we're voting on highlighting non-Inq-written tutorials?
[20:18] <@CC7567> Yes
[20:18] <@Eyrezer> I vote to allow non-Inqs to write tutes.
[20:18] <@Darth_Burger> Sure
[20:18] <@GreenTentacle> I concur.
[20:18] <@Darth_Burger> We don't endorse them.
[20:18] <@IFYLOFD> OK.
[20:18] <@Darth_Burger> They're just guidelines
[20:18] <@CC7567> Can I suggest a change to the wording?
[20:18] <@CC7567> On the page
[20:18] <@Eyrezer> If need be, we could vote in INQ meetings whether we want to remove some that we deem poor
[20:18] <@OptimusRhyme> Of course, CC
[20:19] <@CC7567> I suggest that we change "Featured article tutorials are guides written by members of the Inquisitorius, designed to help readers through the Featured article process." to
[20:19] <@CC7567> "Featured article tutorials are guides written by /experienced Featured Article writers/, designed to help readers through the Featured article process. 
[20:19] <@GreenTentacle> Sure.
[20:19] <@OptimusRhyme> Not all of those users are experience writers though
[20:19] <@OptimusRhyme> d
[20:19] <@Darth_Burger> Shirley 
[20:19] <@OptimusRhyme> Don't call me Shirley
[20:19] <@CC7567> Anyway
[20:19] <@Eyrezer> CC - sounds good
[20:20] <@CC7567> Anyone object?
[20:20] <@Darth_Burger> Maybe approving tutorials from non-Inqs isn't a bad idea
[20:20] <@CC7567> Tope: yeah, that's what I was going to talk about next
[20:20] <@Darth_Burger> That kind of gets too bureaucratic, though
[20:20] <@Darth_Burger> Odds are I don't agree with half of the junk in the tutorials that are written at present :P
[20:20] <@Graestan> I do fear every Tom, Dick, and Harry getting in on it.
[20:20] <@CC7567> Should we just trust that "experienced Featured Article writers" will define and maintain order itself, then?
[20:21] <@GreenTentacle> I really doubt there will be many.
[20:21] <@OptimusRhyme> I could get behind approving them
[20:21] <@Graestan> Approval, yes.
[20:21] <@GreenTentacle> The Inqs were never exactly productive at it.
[20:21] <@OptimusRhyme> Just a general, we like it, or we don't like it
[20:21] <@Graestan> We were busy approving.
[20:21] <@OptimusRhyme> Not too specific to cut sown on bureaucracy 
[20:21] <@OptimusRhyme> *so that we cut down
[20:21] <@GreenTentacle> Graestan: We were? :P
[20:21] <@Eyrezer> lol
[20:21] <@Graestan> Yeah.
[20:22] <@Darth_Burger> I'm falling asleep.
[20:22] <@GreenTentacle> Anyway, happy to approve them first.
[20:22] <@Darth_Burger> Someone do something!
[20:22] <@Eyrezer> Oh well, some of us managed to do both then, I guess 
[20:22] <@GreenTentacle> Let's move on, dangit.
[20:22] <@CC7567> So let's decide on whether or not to approve FA tutorials
[20:22] <@OptimusRhyme> Ok, so we are vote on approving them
[20:22] <@CC7567> Yes
[20:22] <@OptimusRhyme> *voting, sheesh
[20:23] <@Darth_Burger> How about this.
[20:23] <@OptimusRhyme> I say yes
[20:23] <@Darth_Burger> Let people write them.
[20:23] <@Darth_Burger> Anyone.
[20:23] <@Eyrezer> I vote to open them up
[20:23] <@Darth_Burger> If we don't like one, we can bring it up for possible removal or revision
[20:23] <@Graestan> That sounds better.
[20:23] <@Darth_Burger> We don't have to approve their creation
[20:23] <@Culator|Away> Yes.
[20:23] <@CC7567> Per Tope
[20:23] <@GreenTentacle> Yes, let's do that.
[20:24] <@CC7567> So will the proposed wording change to "experienced FA writers" remain, or do you propose that we modify it?
[20:24] <@Darth_Burger> I don't care. :P
[20:24] <@Darth_Burger> Change it to whatever you want.
[20:24] <@GreenTentacle> That's fine by me.
[20:24] <@CC7567> Okay
[20:24] <@GreenTentacle> Can't see who'd write one with no experience.
[20:24] <@Eyrezer> :P
[20:25] <@Graestan> Lots of people /think/ they already know it all.
[20:25] <@CC7567> So in closing, we will change the wording on the FA tutorial page to "experienced Featured Article writers" to allow non-Inqs to write tutorials, and we will take a look at tutorials if need be to see if they need to be modified
[20:25] <@OptimusRhyme> Can we move on now?
[20:25] <@Graestan> But hey, recall is a fine power.
[20:25] <@Graestan> Indeed, per the rapping Transformer.
[20:25] <@GreenTentacle> Move on already!
[20:25] <@CC7567> So, moving one
[20:25] <@CC7567> *on
[20:25] <@CC7567> Anyone have any other items of discussion?
[20:25] <@Culator|Away> Yes. The FA limit.
[20:25] <@GreenTentacle> Yes.
[20:25] <@Culator|Away> Do we still need it?
[20:26] <@GreenTentacle> That for one.
[20:26] <@GreenTentacle>
[20:26] <@Culator|Away> Has it worked?
[20:26] <@GreenTentacle> There's your stats.
[20:26] <@CC7567> So that's the number of FANs at a given point?
[20:26] <@GreenTentacle> No, that's the number on the queue.
[20:26] <@CC7567> Oh, okay.
[20:27] <@OptimusRhyme> I'd say keep it, but I'm not attached to it
[20:27] <@GreenTentacle> It's looking rather healthy since the new voting rules came in.
[20:27] <@Darth_Burger> I think the limit is probably obsolete, but I do kind of expect the FAN page to balloon back up to 50 noms again.
[20:27] <@GreenTentacle> So I can't see the need for the limit now.
[20:27] <@Darth_Burger> Should it be removed, that is
[20:27] <@IFYLOFD> Dump the FAN limit
[20:27] <@GreenTentacle> If it does, then we can look at bringing it back.
[20:27] <@CC7567> I agree with Toprawa, to a certain extent
[20:27] <@Darth_Burger> I could vote to remove it.
[20:27] <@Eyrezer> I'd vote to remove the limit. It has just seen articles pushed to the GAN page, and then onto the FAN, duplicating effort
[20:28] <@CC7567> Okay, let's hold an official vote :P
[20:28] <@Darth_Burger> I'm feeling lucky tonight :P
[20:28] <@GreenTentacle> There's that too.
[20:28] <@IFYLOFD> Never liked it, never will.
[20:28] <@CC7567> Let's vote on it
[20:28] <@OptimusRhyme> Keep
[20:28] <@GreenTentacle> Kill.
[20:28] <@IFYLOFD> I vote kill
[20:28] <@CC7567> I vote remove, but reimplement if we see fit
[20:28] <@Culator|Away> Per CC.
[20:28] <@Eyrezer> I vote remove it
[20:28] <@Fiolli> remove for now
[20:28] <@Graestan> I don't care either way
[20:29] <@CC7567> Okay, the FAN limit has hereby been removed
[20:29] <@Graestan> Still too much work to be done either way
[20:29] <@Darth_Burger> per CC, FWIW
[20:29] <@Graestan> We need to call up our largely absent colleagues and beg them to get to work.
[20:29] <@GreenTentacle> We're keeping up ok now.
[20:29] <@GreenTentacle> Though more help is always good.
[20:29] <@CC7567> So, was there anything else that anyone wanted to discuss?
[20:30] <@GreenTentacle> Yup.
[20:30] <@CC7567> You have the floor, then
[20:30] <@GreenTentacle> Just wanted to run an idea past you and see what you think...
[20:30] <@IFYLOFD> The Honorable Mr. Tentacle has the floor.
[20:30] <@GreenTentacle> These meeting were set up to review articles and scrap the crap ones.
[20:30] <@GreenTentacle> At the time we had around 100 FAs.
[20:30] <@GreenTentacle> We now have almost 1000.
[20:31] <@GreenTentacle> Meetings are long, absentees are numerous and several issues are fixed before we even probe the article.
[20:31] <@GreenTentacle> Would a page like the FAN page be more appropriate now?
[20:31] <@GreenTentacle> Any user can request an article to be looked at.
[20:31] <@GreenTentacle> After a certain period the Inqs vote on whether to keep it.
[20:32] <@GreenTentacle> If issues are fixed quickly, the vote can happen quickly.
[20:32] <@GreenTentacle> We'd still meet to discuss other issues, of course.
[20:32] <@Darth_Burger> That could possibly be done in addition to the moot.
[20:32] <@Fiolli> We do have a forum designed for that, and it has been used even by non-Inqs, fwiw.
[20:32] <@Darth_Burger> I think there would still be opportunity to review articles at the moot
[20:32] <@Graestan> I still think review should go on here.
[20:32] <@GreenTentacle> But the votes don't take place on the forum.
[20:33] <@Graestan> Putting minds together in real time.
[20:33] <@GreenTentacle> I'm basically for expanding that.
[20:33] <@OptimusRhyme> I oppose eliminating a meeting
[20:33] <@IFYLOFD> Per Grae
[20:33] <@Fiolli> No, but I'm not opposed to adding votes to that forum if we think it would scale down the meetings.
[20:33] <@GreenTentacle> So few minds turned up last time that we struggled to get enough votes.
[20:33] <@Darth_Burger> Anyone can still add problem articles to the moot page, etc.
[20:33] <@GreenTentacle> This way, all Inqs get time to take a look.
[20:33] <@Darth_Burger> I think the problem is that we don't hold meetings /enough/
[20:34] <@Darth_Burger> We're lucky to have a meeting once a month
[20:34] <@Graestan> "all" would still not look
[20:34] <@CC7567> Well, at one point in time, it was supposed to be one a week :P
[20:34] <@GreenTentacle> And 4dot fixed an article before we even added the template.
[20:34] <@Darth_Burger> The more FAs we have, the more FAs will have problems, and the more we should be meeting to discuss
[20:34] <@GreenTentacle> Yet it sat on probation for over a month.
[20:34] <@GreenTentacle> The more FAs we have, the more there's a need to do it elsewhere.
[20:35] <@Darth_Burger> I don't think so.
[20:35] <@OptimusRhyme> I disagree. Doing it in real-time is helpful
[20:35] <@Darth_Burger> I'm guessing you're proposing this "sign-off on the talk page" thing the CAN is trying to do
[20:35] <@Darth_Burger> Although not on the talk page, exactly
[20:36] <@Fiolli> I know that Saturdays are terrible times for me... this is the first one I've had "free" for a while (and even today wasn't free). Still, I agree that there are some times where we could streamline things easier. All of CC's approvals that we seconded above are an example. We often defer to people who have knowledge. Sometimes they aren't here. I'd be for /adding/ a chance (though not a...
[20:36] <@Fiolli> ...requirement) for Inqs to vote to keep on the forum page that issues are objected on. If we really put some emphasis in the forum area, we can make this go quickly.
[20:36] <@Darth_Burger> Perhaps we can start a system of just removing articles from the meeting page that have been addressed.
[20:36] <@Darth_Burger> We do that for GAN.
[20:36] <@Darth_Burger> Ideally, I think there should always be a meeting page in operation.
[20:36] <@GreenTentacle> That would help.
[20:36] <@Darth_Burger> Once one meeting expires, the next should be scheduled immediately
[20:36] <@GreenTentacle> But it's 1:36 AM here.
[20:36] <@GreenTentacle> These meetings are a killer.
[20:37] <@Fiolli> But unilateral removal is iffy. I'd like to see multiple people say it is fine before it is a removal.
[20:37] <@GreenTentacle> Anything that we can cover elsewhere would help.
[20:37] <@GreenTentacle> So maybe a hybrid?
[20:37] <@Fiolli> I'm for adding this as an option, should we see it is updated. It could save us the time and effort.
[20:37] <@GreenTentacle> Push the forum pages more and let premature votes happen if stuff is clearly fixed.
[20:37] <@Eyrezer> We already allow for Inqs to record their thoughts on the Inq meeting page
[20:37] <@GreenTentacle> Everything else waits for the meeting so we can discuss it.
[20:38] <@CC7567> I personally would like to see how well this operates before officially voting it in
[20:38] <@Fiolli> Yes, but if it is fixed, then we don't have to go through the probe/keep or kill/keep proceses
[20:38] <@GreenTentacle> And there is precedent for closing one early so as not to move it back on the queue.
[20:38] <@Darth_Burger> I don't mind doing this, so long as it happens on the meeting page.
[20:38] * OptimusRhyme is now known as ChackJadson
[20:38] <@Darth_Burger> As I said, this is essentially what we do for GAN already
[20:39] <@Darth_Burger> though our process is much less formal
[20:39] <@Darth_Burger> we just kind of come on IRC and leave comments for everyone to see
[20:39] <@Fiolli> I'm not suggesting a formal codification.
[20:39] <@Darth_Burger> well, it would need to be formal
[20:39] <@Darth_Burger> that would kind of be the point 
[20:39] <@Darth_Burger> a formal signing-off, so to speak
[20:40] <@Fiolli> I'm simply saying that if there are objections left, corrected, and fixed, then two or three Inqs can simply agree and then it be removed from the "new articles" list. If three Inqs agree, it is no longer probed, should it be.
[20:40] <@Darth_Burger> I think more than three should be required
[20:40] <@Fiolli> It can happen organically, it doesn't need a regimented "let's all look at this one now thing"
[20:40] <@Darth_Burger> I think the GAN equivalent calls for 4 people to agree to remove it, for example
[20:40] <@Fiolli> I'm fine with four.
[20:40] <@Fiolli> If removing from probe.
[20:40] <@ChackJadson> I like 4 for removing from probe
[20:40] <@Darth_Burger> That was an example
[20:41] <@Darth_Burger> I would think more than 4 should be required
[20:41] <@Darth_Burger> We get 5-10 people looking at it at the meeting
[20:41] <@Darth_Burger> That's the beauty of the real-time discussion
[20:41] <@Graestan> Very true.
[20:42] <@GreenTentacle> We don't need 5-10 people to check if an intro redlink has been fixed.
[20:42] <@Darth_Burger> But we should get 5-10 people looking at it for articles needing updating and whatever else
[20:43] <@GreenTentacle> Yes.
[20:43] <@Darth_Burger> If that encompasses redlink issues, so be it
[20:43] <@Darth_Burger> It wouldn't hurt
[20:43] <@Fiolli> I understand both sides, to be honest. I'm only suggesting that easy things be streamlined. Redlink/unsourced quote crap is useless at this meeting.
[20:43] <@Darth_Burger> How about this. Let me know if I'm way off here.
[20:44] <@Darth_Burger> For articles that are placed on the meeting page (which ideally is up and running at all times), for articles that are handled, five Inqs can vote on the meeting page to remove it once handled, then we don't have to waste time with it at the meeting.
[20:44] <@Graestan> That works.
[20:44] <@GreenTentacle> That would help.
[20:44] <@Graestan> I like it.
[20:44] <@CC7567> I'd support that, though a system would have to be developed
[20:44] <@Darth_Burger> This would also allow people to add articles with problems to the meeting page, would allow nominators to be notified of it as is the current process, and then let them fix it, announce it, and we can vote it off as ok
[20:45] <@Eyrezer> Just like the TCW articles could have been
[20:45] <@ChackJadson> I support this
[20:45] <@Fiolli> I suggest a separate section below the list of articles, however, so that it is not too cumbersome.
[20:45] <@CC7567> It might have to be on a subpage, though, or the voting section would just have to be sectioned away from the infobox to make it less clunky
[20:45] <@Darth_Burger> I like Fiolli's idea; I don't like subpages
[20:45] <@CC7567> But the idea still works
[20:46] <@ChackJadson> Separate section below, I'd prefer
[20:46] <@Fiolli> Below attendance, really, because it is no more than an extension of comments.
[20:46] <@Darth_Burger> Consequently, this would also allow people to raise points of concern with an article and potentially oppose it, as is done in a real-time meeting
[20:46] <@Darth_Burger> an article would need less than 2 opposed, as we do now 
[20:47] <@Darth_Burger> VOTE NOW! VOTE NOW! :P
[20:47] <@CC7567> So shall we vote to adopt this new proposal?
[20:47] <@Eyrezer> I support
[20:47] <@CC7567> Support
[20:47] <@GreenTentacle> Support.
[20:47] <@Graestan> Ding ding ding
[20:47] <@Darth_Burger> Support
[20:48] <@ChackJadson> Ja
[20:48] <@Darth_Burger> This would, of course, require us to be more diligent about scheduling new meetings.
[20:48] <@Darth_Burger> I think we can do that, though
[20:48] <@CC7567> So, proposal adopted
[20:48] <@GreenTentacle> That can only be a good thing.
[20:48] <@Graestan> just schedule them a few months out
[20:48] <@CC7567> Do we also want to try and hold meetings more often?
[20:48] <@ChackJadson> No, just more diligently
[20:48] <@Darth_Burger> I like Graestan's idea
[20:48] <@ChackJadson> Once a month
[20:48] <@Darth_Burger> That's interesting
[20:49] <@GreenTentacle> Once a month, but plan ahead.
[20:49] <@ChackJadson> So we might schedule one for like September now?
[20:49] <@ChackJadson> Or even October?
[20:49] <@Darth_Burger> that would be the theory, but that's kind of a long way off 
<-- Cut -->
[20:51] <@ChackJadson> Are we done now?
[20:51] <@GreenTentacle> I'm done.
[20:51] <@CC7567> Okay
[20:51] <@CC7567> Anyone else have concerns?
[20:51] <@Fiolli> I do want on the record, also, that I approve of opening FATs. I had to step out for a couple of minutes.
[20:51] <@ChackJadson> heh, FAT
[20:51] <@CC7567> Sure
[20:51] <@Graestan> who is calling who fat?
[20:51] <@Darth_Burger> heh
[20:51] <@Darth_Burger> FATs
[20:51] <@ChackJadson> !markov
[20:51] <@Nuku-Nuku> Acky: A variety of people.
[20:51] <@Graestan> call them MOOs
[20:51] <@CC7567> Inqmoot Thirty-four is hereby adjourned.
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.