Forum Talk:Non-member Comments and Suggestions on Approvals: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Pages: Content • Governance and Policy • Style • Management • Technical Issues • Requests for Help • Competitors and Press • Archived Boards
imported>Peter Jackson No edit summary |
imported>Hayford Peirce (you're right about this) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
What about review of [[CZ:Approval standards]]? If the/a purpose of the new approvals system is to encourage contributions by giving people something to aim at, that aim needs to be made as clear as possible. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] ([[User talk:Peter Jackson|talk]]) 15:40, 8 January 2018 (UTC) | What about review of [[CZ:Approval standards]]? If the/a purpose of the new approvals system is to encourage contributions by giving people something to aim at, that aim needs to be made as clear as possible. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] ([[User talk:Peter Jackson|talk]]) 15:40, 8 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
:Yes, obviously *that* makes sense! [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] ([[User talk:Hayford Peirce|talk]]) 23:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:46, 8 January 2018
| Help system | All recent posts | Back to top | Contact Administrators | Archives |
|
Non-member Comments and Suggestions on Approvals Committee Members: for discussions, please use the forum. | ||||
Archives
none
What about review of CZ:Approval standards? If the/a purpose of the new approvals system is to encourage contributions by giving people something to aim at, that aim needs to be made as clear as possible. Peter Jackson (talk) 15:40, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, obviously *that* makes sense! Hayford Peirce (talk) 23:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)