| Revision as of 04:09, 29 January 2006 editBrisvegas (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,604 edits portal welcome← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:51, 3 January 2007 edit undoCyde (talk | contribs)28,155 editsm Reverted edits by Scifiintel (talk) to last version by Rgulerdem | ||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| Hi C.J., and thanks for signing up to the portal! As a member, you have no obligations, but are free to suggest any articles or pictures to showcase, as well as suggest improvements to the portal itself. Hopefully I'll see you round the wiki! ] 04:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC) | Hi C.J., and thanks for signing up to the portal! As a member, you have no obligations, but are free to suggest any articles or pictures to showcase, as well as suggest improvements to the portal itself. Hopefully I'll see you round the wiki! ] 04:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC) | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Hi, | |||
| We started a proposal ] to state the existing policies coherently and make suggestions on improving the editorial standards in Wiki. I thought you might be interested in contributing to that proposal. | |||
| Unfortunately, a pro-porn and pro-offense lobby is trying to make this proposal a failure. They unilaterally started an approval poll although almost no one including me believe that it is time for a vote, simply because the policy is not ready. It is not even written completely. | |||
| Editors who thinks that the policy needs to be improved rather than killed by an unfair poll at the beginning of the proposal, started another poll ('Do we really need a poll at this stage?') at the same time. The poll is vandalized for a while but it is stable now. A NO vote on this ('Do we really need a poll now?') poll will strengthen the position of the editors who are willing to improve the ethics policy further. | |||
| If you have concerns about the ethics and editorial standards in Wiki, please visit the page ] with your suggestions on the policy. We have two subpages: Arguments and Sections. You might want to consider reviewing these pages as well... | |||
| Thanks in advance. ] 00:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 19:51, 3 January 2007
Archive: User talk:Icj tlc/Archive1
Moved Jason Gastrich to Archive1
Moved this stuff over as this issue has cooled off. Icj tlc 23:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Your name in lights
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich
Hi C.J.
Hi C.J., I'm a C.J. too. I saw your comment on Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Jason_Gastrich#Inside_view_by_Icj_tlc, and checked out your User Page. Just wanted to say hi.--Azathar 02:49, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Portal:Christianity
Hi C.J., and thanks for signing up to the portal! As a member, you have no obligations, but are free to suggest any articles or pictures to showcase, as well as suggest improvements to the portal itself. Hopefully I'll see you round the wiki! Brisvegas 04:09, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Wikiethics
Hi,
We started a proposal Misplaced Pages:Wikiethics to state the existing policies coherently and make suggestions on improving the editorial standards in Wiki. I thought you might be interested in contributing to that proposal.
Unfortunately, a pro-porn and pro-offense lobby is trying to make this proposal a failure. They unilaterally started an approval poll although almost no one including me believe that it is time for a vote, simply because the policy is not ready. It is not even written completely.
Editors who thinks that the policy needs to be improved rather than killed by an unfair poll at the beginning of the proposal, started another poll ('Do we really need a poll at this stage?') at the same time. The poll is vandalized for a while but it is stable now. A NO vote on this ('Do we really need a poll now?') poll will strengthen the position of the editors who are willing to improve the ethics policy further.
If you have concerns about the ethics and editorial standards in Wiki, please visit the page Misplaced Pages:Wikiethics with your suggestions on the policy. We have two subpages: Arguments and Sections. You might want to consider reviewing these pages as well...
Thanks in advance. Resid Gulerdem 00:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)