77:
I know that I cannot take a plus or a star as a guarantor of quality, because articles continue to be edited after reaching
Featured status. And while it is possible to see the exact version of an article at the time it was promoted, there's a high chance that it's going to contain broken templates, deleted images, or outdated information, which makes it an unattractive prospect. (I also suspect that most readers wouldn't know how to find the version of the page that was featured.)
76:
When I access
Knowledge (XXG) as a reader, rather than an editor, I certainly don't pay any heed to the Good and Featured article markers. If an article is good then I know it's good, by virtue of it being well written, thorough, and well sourced. I don't need a plus or a star to tell me. Conversely,
91:
are great. Or at least, they can and should be great. But they frequently are not. And I know I am as guilty of that as anyone. What I keep reminding myself is that writing a quick edit summary might save my time, but writing a good edit summary will save the time of everyone else who reads it, be
55:
I am still learning how best to
Knowledge (XXG). I do not have everything figured out (and nor does anyone else). The opinions that I have now are probably not going to be the same as the opinions I hold in twleve months, which are probably not going to be the same as the opinions I hold in five
104:
than to agree with it. I know there are
Knowledge (XXG) policies that I personally disagree with, but I am willing to accept them, because that's an integral part of working on any project of this size. It would be frankly miraculous were everyone on Knowledge (XXG) to agree with all policies.
72:
and the likes). Obviously, having high quality content is desirable, but I don't particularly see the benefits to the specific criteria and formal peer review process involved in raising an article to Good or
Featured status. Or rather, I do see marginal benefits, but I consider them to be
92:
that on their watchlist, recent changes, the page history, or anywhere else. I do not believe that my time is inherently more valuable than anyone else's, so I should take the time needed to write good edit summaries. I don't always do so, but I always should.
108:
This means that people should be free to express disagreement with consensus without negative consequence (provided it is done at the appropriate time and place, and with appropriate civility, of course). This includes everything from talk page discussions to
121:, the tracking of AFD stats, or sometimes just outright breaches of civility policy. If a person has any reason to be wary of offering an opinion that disagrees with consensus, then they are less likely to give that opinion. This leads to
113:
to core policies. For instance, it should be fine to disagree with consensus and voice the opinion that we should allow original research on
Knowledge (XXG); it should not be fine to ignore consensus and add original research anyway.
42:
I have health issues that occasionally keep me away from
Knowledge (XXG). If we are in the middle of a conversation and I go silent, then this is likely what happened. Thank you for remaining patient.
80:
If anyone feels like explaining to me what the point of featured content is, or what problem it's designed to solve, then I would be genuinely interested to hear it.
39:
account. To the best of my knowledge, my previous account was not and never had been under any bans, blocks, or sanctions, and was last used in 2009.
117:
Too often, I see agreement with consensus being seen as a virtue and disagreement with consensus as a vice. This can come in the form of
56:
years. And this is right and proper. The day that I think I have eveything figured out is the day I should pack everything in.
73:
completely out of proportion with the time and energy that go into turning an article that is good into a Good
Article.
36:
101:
122:
118:
110:
69:
65:
154:
142:
150:
17:
138:
134:
100:
I believe that it is much more important for an individual to abide by
153:, my favourite gender-neutral third-person singular pronouns are the
146:
158:
88:
129:"About me" section that you definitely shouldn't care about
46:
Thoughts and opinions that you probably don't care about
64:I don't really see the point to featured content (
8:
125:which makes true consensus impossible.
7:
149:, my favourite oceanic ridge is the
133:My favourite chess opening is the
25:
141:, my favourite medieval ruler is
1:
157:, and my favourite Muppet is
175:
145:, my favourite Pokémon is
128:
45:
31:Marginally important stuff
137:, my favourite number is
123:pluralistic ignorance
111:deletion discussions
66:Featured Articles
18:User:Lowercaserho
16:(Redirected from
166:
60:Featured content
21:
174:
173:
169:
168:
167:
165:
164:
163:
155:Spivak pronouns
131:
98:
86:
62:
53:
48:
33:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
172:
170:
130:
127:
97:
94:
89:Edit summaries
85:
84:Edit summaries
82:
61:
58:
52:
49:
47:
44:
32:
29:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
171:
162:
160:
156:
152:
148:
144:
143:Razia Sultana
140:
136:
126:
124:
120:
115:
112:
106:
103:
95:
93:
90:
83:
81:
78:
74:
71:
70:Good Articles
67:
59:
57:
50:
43:
40:
38:
30:
28:
19:
151:Gakkel Ridge
132:
116:
107:
99:
87:
79:
75:
63:
54:
41:
34:
26:
37:clean start
135:Old Benoni
35:This is a
119:badgering
102:consensus
96:Consensus
51:Learning
27:Hello.
147:Mareep
159:Rowlf
161:.
139:98
68:,
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.