Rules on this talk page[]
Only administrators may edit this section
- This is not a place for arguments.
- This is the place for voting proposals only.
- You can't vote on your own proposal.
- If you support a proposal, use Support — (under the name {{Support}} with your reason and signature)
- If you oppose a proposal, use Oppose — (under the name {{Oppose}} with your reason and signature).
- If you are neutral with a proposal, use Neutral — (under the name {{Neutral}} with your reason and signature).
- When you see Approved — (under the name {{Approved}} signed with the admin's name), it means the proposal is accepted.
- When you see Denied - (under the name {{Denied}} signed with the admin's name), it means the proposal is denied.
- Do not delete, change or strike out (
like this) someone else's vote. You can only delete or change your own votes.
Comments[]
I don't like Articles having Comment sections. The replying system gets all weird, and it all goes very messy when you have multiple users talking to one another. This is why I propose, to the other Admins, that we remove Comments from Articles, and return to talk pages, which are easier to reply on.
Talking with comments:
User1: This page sucks
- User2: No it doesn't
- User3: I agree
There is now some confusion as to what view the hypothetical User3 has. With talk pages, it is obvious:
User1: This page sucks
- User2: No it doesn'
- User3: I agree
Which is why I believe we should go to talk pages, not comments.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Local Mafia Boss (talk • contribs • blog) at 21:26,9/5/2024 (UTC)
Additional information[]
Ismael, you can do that on talk pages. Objection overuled, and negative vote nullified
Votes (+1)[]
Oppose — I believe it should be kept because it gives feedback and the opinions on the ideas on the article, Ismael Perez (Talk) 23:59, January 11, 2014 (UTC)
This can be found indirectly on a talkpage by clicking on the 'talk page' button.90.244.84.59 14:47, January 15, 2014 (UTC)
Oppose — I think the comments function is better, although it does indeed have its flaws. For map games, a page can be created. DaneOfTheNorth (talk) 19:06, January 12, 2014 (UTC)
Support — I am for this because with the fourms working the way they do you can have it both ways. so why not?
Wingman1 05:07, January 14, 2014 (UTC)
Support — The list of comment boxes look scruffy, I prefer the more professional 'Wikipeadia look' and style of a talk page.The River Nile-2 (talk) 02:23, January 15, 2014 (UTC)
Support — Comments look ugly and dont function well for articles. Profile (Hail Marius•Something that should never happen)
Final results[]
Approved — Ismael Perez (Talk) 23:08, January 16, 2014 (UTC)
Comments[]
Ismael, it is still an irrelevant and incorrect objection, and has been removed Local Mafia Boss (Talk) (Blog)
They look more snappy and gosh!Oniontree1 (talk) 02:30, July 28, 2015 (UTC)
Modify category listing[]
I think the listing of categories should be modified so it's not an exactly copy from Future Wiki. DaneOfTheNorth (talk) 13:42, February 6, 2014 (UTC)
Yeh. Whipsnade (talk) 19:17, September 11, 2014 (UTC)
Ratings[]
Date | Views | Edits | Photos |
---|---|---|---|
Totals | 896 | 133 | 31 |
See more stats | |||
Jul 27 | 92 | 0 | 0 |
Jul 26 | 119 | 13 | 2 |
Jul 25 | 123 | 4 | 0 |
Jul 24 | 289 | 47 | 0 |
Jul 23 | 138 | 28 | 4 |
Jul 22 | 50 | 11 | 8 |
Jul 21 | 85 | 30 | 17 |
Oniontree1 (talk) 02:32, July 28, 2015 (UTC)