Talk:Translation of the week/Translation candidates

Old discussions are found in /Archive 1.

Are candidates proposed by anonymous users valid? And votes?

I feel they shouldn't, but I ask an opinion to all of you. In the eventuality they shouldn't be valid, I suggest to edit the description at the beginning. Torne 15:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Can't agree with you more. Candidates should be proposed by registered users.--RekishiEJ 01:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

@RekishiEJ, what about voting? @other people: come on, more opinions, don't be shy :). Torne 15:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, voting should be done by only registered users.--RekishiEJ 19:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

per --Shizhao 02:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

And registered users shouldn't have more than 10 nominated articles in the list at the same time. Boivie 09:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think this restriction is completely unnecessary, since the candidate list only has less than 200 candidates. Besides, there are still many English Wikipedia articles worthy of being TOTWs. By the way, one IP user add a candidate to the list, from the doctrine "candidates proposed by anonymous users invalid", that candidate was invalid and thus should be removed.--RekishiEJ 14:31, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it is important to let many more users be involved in the nominating process, and let them nominate articles that they think are good candidates, while at the same time reducing the number of entries drastically. There are way too many entries right now. Boivie 16:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

If IP votes are allowed, this would make it easy to vote several times. I could vote when logged in, log out to vote again as IP, go to a different computer to vote a third time with another IP, and so on. Proposing candidates per se is not a problem to me; only, they would start at zero votes instead of one, since the proposer's vote won't count. (Stefan2 17:57, 20 October 2011 (UTC))

I fully agree with Stefan2. Everyone should be able to propose candidates, but not counted as votes (without even giving reasons at all to support or oppose).

In addition, if IP votes aren’t counted and a voter votes with 2 or 3 accounts (not at the same time, but perhaps with some weeks inbetween), then he can alone be the reason that translation candidates will not be taken, also after years of support from others. So, when do accounts count that give no reason for opposing (or supporting) at all? If IP votes don’t count, then there should at least be some kind of eligibility check. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter at all, if IP votes count or not. There are two ways to check consensus: to check eligibility according to some kind of eligibility system or just giving good reasons and not counting at all, but just checking the reasons and see, if there is a consensus or not. But the system here seems to mix both systems. But if it doesn’t matter, if people vote with more than one account, then IP votes can also be counted. Then it should be looked after the reasons instead of just the count of votes. --Geitost ^diskusjon 14:01, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

w:May Overthrow

I would like to suggest one article that I think it is really important for world history, but I don't know may I (is it already more than 200 articles) and where I should new candidates (under section with 0 net support?). -- Bojan  Talk  05:24, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Over entries

Please save to another place. For example your user sandbox.--Flamelai 07:23, 3 December 2010 (UTC)