CZ:Proposals/Approval system for CZ: pages: Difference between revisions
imported>Gareth Leng No edit summary |
imported>Gareth Leng No edit summary |
||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
== Reasoning == | == Reasoning == | ||
Below is copied the discussion from an earlier, discarded proposal, that led to the present proposal. | Below is copied the discussion from an earlier, discarded proposal (See [[CZ:Proposals > CZ Community pages should be revised for simplicity]]), that led to the present proposal. | ||
'''That''' proposal was justified thus: | '''That''' proposal was justified thus: | ||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
= Discussion = | = Discussion = | ||
See [[CZ:Proposals > CZ Community pages should be revised for simplicity]] | |||
{{Proposals navigation}} | {{Proposals navigation}} |
Revision as of 04:21, 15 February 2008
This proposal has not yet been assigned to any decisionmaking group or decisionmaker(s).
The Proposals Manager will do so soon if and when the proposal or issue is "well formed" (including having a driver).
For now, the proposal record can be found in the new proposals queue.
Complete explanation
I think it's simple, we just extend the Approval/Draft system to all CZ pages. They become approved once approved by executive committee members, and then a draft is open to revise. I think an approved version should remain editable for minor things without re-approval. But there will be two versions, a formally approved version, and an evolving draft alternative.
Approval process for CZ: pages.
A member of the executive committee places a "ToApprove" template on the article's talk (discussion) page. That template will be marked with a date, usually several days to a week from the date that it is placed - but at least 24 hours.
This template acts as an announcement -- if the approval template remains there, approval will occur on that date. Meanwhile, discussion and edits continue on the article. When an article is nominated for approval, this status often draws new eyes to the article, and it can be expected that revisions will occur. In the culture of Citizendium, edits at this stage by novices to the subject are discouraged. The important role for non-experts is to make recommendations and criticisms on the talk page.
If another member of the executive committee finds that the article is so objectionable that approval, in his considered opinion, should not be granted, then the template is removed by this member, who puts his reasons for this action on the talk page.
If the nominator notes that the discussion on the talk page that has occurred since the nomination for approval brings up important objections, then he or she may delay the date for approval on the "to approve" template,to allow for work to continue before the stable version is generated. The nominator may also change the version nominated for approval on the "to approve" template to an updated draft that is considered superior to the one first nominated.
Unless the template is removed, on the designated date, a sysop (a person with "sysop" administrative rights on the wiki) then freezes the approved version of the article on the main article page under an
Article approved by [[User:{{{editor}}}|an editor]] (see the talk page) of the [[CZ:{{{group}}} Workgroup|{{{group}}} Workgroup]]. While we have done conscientious work, we cannot guarantee that this article is wholly free of mistakes. Help improve this article further on the draft page! |
[[Category:{{{group}}} Approved]]
template. At that freeze, a draft form of the article is generated. This draft is not frozen, but is open to edits as are all unapproved articles on the wiki.
Addendum: after approval, copyediting and minor changes may be performed by any member of the executive committee with the help of the approvals editor. This may occur at any time.
Who may approve:
For any CZ page, only members of the executive committee may approve.
Reasoning
Below is copied the discussion from an earlier, discarded proposal (See [[CZ:Proposals > CZ Community pages should be revised for simplicity]]), that led to the present proposal.
That proposal was justified thus: "....Part of what is keeping our "elitism shield" up is that many (if not all) of the community pages are overly complex. A campaign to heavily review and edit the pages will give us leaner, easy-to-comprehend documentation and improve our external appearance."
Implementation
As far as I can see this just needs Executive Committee endorsement.
Discussion
See [[CZ:Proposals > CZ Community pages should be revised for simplicity]]
Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only) | |
|
Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):
|