On 13/09/06, Nathaniel spangineer@gmail.com wrote:
David, what exactly are you referring to here? Most of the minor detail type things that come up in FACs are pretty easy to fix (such as formatting and consistency issues). Other potentially bigger problems that are still somewhat debatable are things like prose quality and reference quality, and these can take more time. But in the end, the resulting work is usually significantly superior to the old version (at least as far as I can tell, being someone who thinks WP:RS and WP:CITE are indispensable). Which of these do you see as shrubberies, or am I missing another option?
Objections which are answered by the nominator but which the objectors can't be found to cross off lead to the nomination failing, for example. Go read WT:FAC, there's an example listed. The nominator in that case was told "gee, go away and try harder."
My objection is to a process which the regulars can straight-facedly say to someone who just got an FA and is objecting to the personalised shittiness of the process, "go away and learn to write properly" and have this tolerated as a response. Does that encourage the content creators to actually bother, or to say "screw you guys, I'm going home"?
- d.
- d.