On 13/09/06, Nathaniel <spangineer(a)gmail.com> wrote:
David, what exactly are you referring to here? Most
of the minor detail
type things that come up in FACs are pretty easy to fix (such as formatting
and consistency issues). Other potentially bigger problems that are still
somewhat debatable are things like prose quality and reference quality, and
these can take more time. But in the end, the resulting work is usually
significantly superior to the old version (at least as far as I can tell,
being someone who thinks WP:RS and WP:CITE are indispensable). Which of
these do you see as shrubberies, or am I missing another option?
Objections which are answered by the nominator but which the objectors
can't be found to cross off lead to the nomination failing, for
example. Go read WT:FAC, there's an example listed. The nominator in
that case was told "gee, go away and try harder."
My objection is to a process which the regulars can straight-facedly
say to someone who just got an FA and is objecting to the personalised
shittiness of the process, "go away and learn to write properly" and
have this tolerated as a response. Does that encourage the content
creators to actually bother, or to say "screw you guys, I'm going
home"?
- d.
- d.