User:Veila

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The correct title of this article is veila. The initial letter is capitalised due to technical restrictions.

Boxed wisdom SI This user prefers the metric system of measurement. en This user is a native speaker of English. it-1 Questo utente può contribuire con un livello semplice di italiano. xhtml-4 This user is an expert XHTML user. css-3 This user is an advanced Cascading Style Sheets user. This user contributes using Safari. EFC This user supports Everton SYD This user supports Sydney FC This user advocates the use of more cowbell.

[edit] Construction site

• Hard hats mandatory
• CD Everton

[edit] WPF: Importance scale

The importance scale used in the assessment department is, at present, highly generic. This makes it somewhat more difficult to use than perhaps should be the case.

Using a loose taxonomy with a principle of importance, I think we can make things far more approachable without requiring a substantial set of re-classifications. The current system is:

Status	Meaning of Status
Top	This article is of the utmost importance to this project, as it forms the basis of all information.
High	This article is fairly important to this project, as it covers a general area of knowledge.
Mid	This article is relatively important to this project, as it fills in some more specific knowledge of certain areas.
Low	This article is of little importance to this project, but it covers a highly specific area of knowledge or an obscure piece of trivia.

• Top importance articles are identified as those forming the basis of all information. My interpretation of this is that it includes rules, all regional and dominant national FAs, global tournaments and dominant leagues globally. I can see no way that a player or club could form such a base.

• High importance articles cover a general area of knowledge. FAs and leagues that fail to reach the level of notariety required for Top would spill into this category, along with the dominant clubs, such as those competing in the top-flight of a Top rated league, historically significant clubs, very important stadia and regional tournaments. Putting highly notable players into this category, while appropriate in the spirit of categorisation by importance, is a dangerous idea. It would lead to inevitable disagreement about merit.

• Mid importance articles would hold any other club that is deemed notable enough to be on Wikipedia, players notable enough to be on Wikipedia, other stadia and smaller tournaments.

• Finally, Low importance articles would remain about the specific or trivial.

In general, a player is less important than a club, is less important than a league, is less important than an association, is less important than any global tournament/organisation/rule definition. Likewise, a stadium or other dependent article would normally be one rank lower than the club who own/use it. ⁂veila# 07:16, 19 January 2007 (UTC)