MarioWiki talk:Proposals/Header: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→Dates: new section) |
(→Dates: arbitrary) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:But the Admins as a whole decide who gets promoted: the only 'Crat-specific part of the process is pushing the button (and writing the log), but procedure trumps technical details. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 11:32, 4 July 2013 (EDT) | :But the Admins as a whole decide who gets promoted: the only 'Crat-specific part of the process is pushing the button (and writing the log), but procedure trumps technical details. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 11:32, 4 July 2013 (EDT) | ||
== Dates == | ==Dates== | ||
Can the example dates be updated? It makes this page look really out of date when they're over four years ago (1 Aug 2016 is a Monday again, for simplicity). - [[User:Reboot|Reboot]] ([[User talk:Reboot|talk]]) 23:58, 14 December 2015 (EST) | Can the example dates be updated? It makes this page look really out of date when they're over four years ago (1 Aug 2016 is a Monday again, for simplicity). - [[User:Reboot|Reboot]] ([[User talk:Reboot|talk]]) 23:58, 14 December 2015 (EST) | ||
:"Outdated" implies the page isn't useful anymore, but the standards have not changed since the example was made, so it's still perfectly accurate and functional - ''not'' outdated, and I see no compelling reason whatsoever to arbitrarily change the examples. If anything, having a rules section that's been written solidly enough to not need overhauling for over 4 years is a thing to be proud of. - {{User:Walkazo/sig}} 00:35, 15 December 2015 (EST) | |||
Revision as of 00:35, December 15, 2015
Order
Can somebody explain me why is the How to subsection before the table of contents while the Talk page proposals one is after it? I don't want a technical answer, but I'd like to hear the reason, I'm just wondering :)
Banon (talk · edits) 11:53, 31 May 2013 (EDT)
- So that all the TPP stuff is grouped together on MarioWiki:Proposals. - Walkazo 20:05, 31 May 2013 (EDT)
Punctuation
Shouldn't there be a closing square bracket somewhere in the "Deadline" row? GBAToad (talk) 00:36, 28 June 2013 (EDT)
On Rule #16: replace Administrators with Bureaucrats (because Administrators cannot promote or demote)--
07:04, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
- But the Admins as a whole decide who gets promoted: the only 'Crat-specific part of the process is pushing the button (and writing the log), but procedure trumps technical details. - Walkazo 11:32, 4 July 2013 (EDT)
Dates
Can the example dates be updated? It makes this page look really out of date when they're over four years ago (1 Aug 2016 is a Monday again, for simplicity). - Reboot (talk) 23:58, 14 December 2015 (EST)
- "Outdated" implies the page isn't useful anymore, but the standards have not changed since the example was made, so it's still perfectly accurate and functional - not outdated, and I see no compelling reason whatsoever to arbitrarily change the examples. If anything, having a rules section that's been written solidly enough to not need overhauling for over 4 years is a thing to be proud of. - Walkazo 00:35, 15 December 2015 (EST)
