CZ Talk:Article Inclusion Policy

Inadequate?

In the resolution itself, "inadequate" is struck through, which I interpret as an intention to drop the word from the final phrasing. Yet here, it is still there. Thanks for clarification. --Daniel Mietchen 05:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

suggest a rephrase

I don't mean to criticize anyone, but I suggest the first paragraph be slightly rewritten as follows:

An article may be deleted by editorial decision in cases where all three of the following criteria are met: a) the aricle has significant weaknesses; b) deleting its content would remove nothing of importance from the project; and c) it is unlikely to be improved as there is no active interest from any member of Citizendium in developing it.

I adjusted the grammar for the list and removed an unnecesary introductory phrase: it should be obvious that this is a policy, since it is in CZ: space and has been confirmed by the Editorial Council. --Joe Quick 15:53, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Joe, this is the exact wording of the motion which we passed. I agree that we should paraphrase the policy and explain it to users in an accessible way. I also think the the exact, binding text of the Regulation should be included in some way, perhaps as an aside? I don't think we should just change the text of the reg without noting that this version has been changed from the actual text which was passed by the EC.

Good critique is, good. Johan A. Förberg 23:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)