Wikipedia:Motto of the day/OS discussion Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


	Motto of the Day
	Approved Overseer Desk Discussion Rejected Schedule Nominations

This is the archive page for any discussion made on the Overseers' desk. Please place new (entire) discussions at the top of this list, once the discussion has been concluded.

1 Childzy
2 Limit of Overseers
3 Noms page - Approval and Rejection and the end-user

[edit] Childzy

This discussion was concluded with Childzy being moved to Past overseers Should we put Childzy in the "Past overseers" column until he returns? David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{The rest} _{is silence!} 01:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes. 210.50.80.181 11:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- OK, we have consensus, as I am the only idiot who is running this here show! So be it! 210.50.80.181 11:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  - Those IPs were me. Forgot to log in. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{The rest} _{is silence!} 11:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
    - I agree too. He can move back in when he is active again. Daniel .Bryant 11:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
      - Cool; it is so. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{The rest} _{is silence!} 06:28, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
      - Good idea, I support it. Geo. 22:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Limit of Overseers

My first thought it that we need to place a restriction on Overseers. As overseers, we perform janitorial tasks, and with too many people doing these tasks, inconsistancies (sp? I'm hopeless tonight...) may occur. Also, an odd number *may* make voting on Overseer procedures (after discussion, of course :p), and a smaller number would prevent delays. Although it may not seem like a problem at the moment, with only 5 of us, my experience with various setups like this indicates that if we lay down the limit now, problems with us doing it later (and therefore closer to other applications) will be avoided. Also, I decided to add a new voting/discussion system, which may be used from all future voting topics. Cheers, Daniel .Bryant 09:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Discuss! Daniel .Bryant 09:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I have contacted the overseers who have thus far not voted on this. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 09:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

OK. Nice work. Daniel .Bryant 09:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

As Childzy is on an indefinite WikiBreak, Vanderdecken has the election-deciding vote! He too is on WikiBreak, but only until tomorrow. We can expect a decision within two days... David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 09:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I think we can safely say that we're the only ones who care about this. Consensus hath been wrought! So it is written; so shall it be! David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 12:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Support

David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 08:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Support five limit Geo. 00:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose

[edit] Abstain

[edit] Noms page - Initial proposals

I have changed the example motto template, as I feel we need not have people write their motto twice. That's what the heading is for. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 09:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Noms page - Approval and Rejection and the end-user

Hi all overseers. On the noms page I have added: "Only the overseers (they know who they are...) are permitted to post Approved or Rejected, for technical reasons. Please use Support or Oppose instead". This is because I have noticed an increase of people using Approved or Rejected when voting, which are reserved for use by overseers only. It is incredulously annoying to read that a motto has been approved, then search for it in the approved section, and not find anything, only to return to the noms page to find that it wasn't actually approved.

Let us enforce this new law! Punishments for disobeying must be formulated.

David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 11:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

this is a good idea Support Geo. 19:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Does a beating with a Scourge, followed by crucifixion sound like a suiting punishment? It does to me... lol. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 06:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I went thru and changed all the non-"overseer" votes from Approve -> Support and Reject -> Oppose. If this was bad, just revert to the prior version. Daniel.Bryant 11:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Danny boy. Good work. I have created a warning template that overseers can post on user's talk pages if they use Approved or Rejected. See here. The template can be used by adding {{Wikipedia:Motd/Template:Warnvote}} . I could not figure out how to add the tildes into the template, so it won't sign your name automatically. Instead, just leave it unsigned. If someone can figure that out, feel free to edit the template.David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 01:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and we won't bother using the template on users who Danny just changed, unless they do it again. Hopefully we can stay on top of this and prevent one of us having to change all the votes again. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 01:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

To see the template in action, go to User_talk:Thefourdotelipsis#Your_votes_for_the_Wikipedia_Motto_of_the_day. David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Let us to it,} _Pell-Mell 01:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/o/t/Wikipedia%7EMotto_of_the_day_OS_discussion_Archive_58b4.html"