Template:Main Page/Message from the Editor: Difference between revisions
ElectAbuzzzz (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Politoed666 (talk | contribs) m (New-ish MFTE.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==July | ==July 10== | ||
Note that a new item has been added to our {{bp|Userspace policy}} concerning pages/templates in the userspace that spoof the interface. They are no longer allowed. Most notably, users with the "New Messages" template on their page are advised to remove it ''immediately''. It's annoying and not the least bit funny. Thanks. | |||
Also, starting this month, we are going to revive the {{bp|featured articles}} process on Bulbapedia. On the first of every month, one featured article will be featured in this space. The first one will be in August, while July will serve us to try the new system: | |||
Every FA nomination will remain open for one month, at the end of which we will decide whether or not to give the article in question Featured Article status or not. Just like before, every user can nominate any article {{bp|featured article candidates|the old way}}, as long as the article fits {{bp|what is a featured article?|the criteria}}. Every user may vote, provided that they explain their opinion – but note that the topic in question isn’t what the ''subject'' of the article is, but how good it is – its prose, details, accuracy, design, and level of interest. The final decision will not be based on the number of votes alone, but on their content as well. | Every FA nomination will remain open for one month, at the end of which we will decide whether or not to give the article in question Featured Article status or not. Just like before, every user can nominate any article {{bp|featured article candidates|the old way}}, as long as the article fits {{bp|what is a featured article?|the criteria}}. Every user may vote, provided that they explain their opinion – but note that the topic in question isn’t what the ''subject'' of the article is, but how good it is – its prose, details, accuracy, design, and level of interest. The final decision will not be based on the number of votes alone, but on their content as well. | ||
Many of the articles that were nominated up until today have changed a lot in the long time they were nominated, and so many votes became irrelevant. To start off with a clean slate, the nomination page was cleared and all nominees were voted on. [[History of Pokémon]] received featured status, and several other articles have been re-nominated with a fresh slate. The rest were rejected for the time being. | Many of the articles that were nominated up until today have changed a lot in the long time they were nominated, and so many votes became irrelevant. To start off with a clean slate, the nomination page was cleared and all nominees were voted on. [[History of Pokémon]] received featured status, and several other articles have been re-nominated with a fresh slate. The rest were rejected for the time being. | ||
<p style="text-align: right;">[[Bulbapedia:Messages from the Editor|Read more]] | [[Bulbapedia:Messages from the Editor|Past messages]]</p> | <p style="text-align: right;">[[Bulbapedia:Messages from the Editor|Read more]] | [[Bulbapedia:Messages from the Editor|Past messages]]</p> | ||
Revision as of 19:21, 10 July 2009
July 10
Note that a new item has been added to our Userspace policy concerning pages/templates in the userspace that spoof the interface. They are no longer allowed. Most notably, users with the "New Messages" template on their page are advised to remove it immediately. It's annoying and not the least bit funny. Thanks.
Also, starting this month, we are going to revive the featured articles process on Bulbapedia. On the first of every month, one featured article will be featured in this space. The first one will be in August, while July will serve us to try the new system:
Every FA nomination will remain open for one month, at the end of which we will decide whether or not to give the article in question Featured Article status or not. Just like before, every user can nominate any article the old way, as long as the article fits the criteria. Every user may vote, provided that they explain their opinion – but note that the topic in question isn’t what the subject of the article is, but how good it is – its prose, details, accuracy, design, and level of interest. The final decision will not be based on the number of votes alone, but on their content as well.
Many of the articles that were nominated up until today have changed a lot in the long time they were nominated, and so many votes became irrelevant. To start off with a clean slate, the nomination page was cleared and all nominees were voted on. History of Pokémon received featured status, and several other articles have been re-nominated with a fresh slate. The rest were rejected for the time being.
