UDWiki talk:Administration/Sysop Archives/Vantar/2007-11-16 Misconduct
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Vantar
I don't see an 'expired' policies section, and it wasn't voted on, so it couldn't be accepted or rejected...so this, sir, is just plain crazy. I submit that you are on an irrational vendetta against this policy because everyone's voting for it... except those whom the policy holds accountable. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 03:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps creating and using UDWiki:Administration/Policy_Discussion/Archive-that page and chalking this whole affair up to a good faith series of mistakes would be best. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 03:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- I submit that you need to read the guidelines, specifically Rule 4:
It says: |
Any discussion which doesn't go to voting in 2 weeks will be archived. |
- --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 03:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Precedent has them going to withdrawn, not voting.--Karekmaps?! 03:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- It was in rejected, hence the confusion... and withdrawn, I suppose would be alright...but I personally think having an archive page would be better than saying withdrawn. But that's just my two cents. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 03:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Then make a policy, and move it too voting before 2 weeks.--Karekmaps?! 03:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Withdrawn basically means it never went to voting. Theres no point creating more confusion by adding a fourth archive for the very weak difference between withdrawn and expired policies. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 04:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- It was in rejected, hence the confusion... and withdrawn, I suppose would be alright...but I personally think having an archive page would be better than saying withdrawn. But that's just my two cents. Nalikill TALK E! W! M! USAI 03:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)