Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013/en
Banner is broken across multiple wikis[edit]
I can't "x" out the banner box when it appears on Wiktionary, Wikidata, Wikispecies, Wikisource, etc. Clicking on the "X", which should close the banner, instead brings me here every time. --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
- I have the same problem. Please fix this! I don't want to be brought to websites without having clicked on a link directing to them. --Mathmensch (talk) 19:14, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
- Now it works. Thanks. --Mathmensch (talk) 10:44, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
When / Where did Board adopt these Voting Eligibility Requirements?[edit]
Under the Bylaws, the Board is free to adopt rules for voter eligibility. I understand that. I'm just looking for some record of when they adopted the current rules. Meeting minutes, etc. It appears I've been disenfranchised by those rules, because even though I have over 1,000 edits, I took a few months off recently and won't satisfy "have made at least 20 edits between 15 December 2012 and 30 April 2013." It seems to me that this quarterly approach to eligibility is ill-advised when what's being voted on are offices that have two-year terms. I agree that you want voters to be those actively engaged in the community, and not those who made 300 edits five years ago and then disappeared, but I think the current rule judges who is "active" too rigidly. Brianwc (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
- I tend to agree with you, though quarterly may not be the best word to describe it, as it's 4 months and a half. But what would be the best length of time? The RedBurn (talk) 11:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
- I would suggest that since Trustees are elected for two year terms then the relevant time period over which to judge someone's activity is the last two years. That might mean that the number of edits expected is higher, perhaps at least 100 across all projects, but I think the longer time frame would be more inclusive of those that consider themselves part of the community. Brianwc (talk) 04:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
- +1. 100 edits over the past 2 years seems sound to me for future elections. More generally, there should be an annual discussion of eligibility reqs for various elections (we will have FDC elections annually now), and it should not happen 3 months before the election is held. A standing election committee might help here. –SJ talk 00:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
- I would suggest that since Trustees are elected for two year terms then the relevant time period over which to judge someone's activity is the last two years. That might mean that the number of edits expected is higher, perhaps at least 100 across all projects, but I think the longer time frame would be more inclusive of those that consider themselves part of the community. Brianwc (talk) 04:22, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Nuisance[edit]
I have several times entered a subject in the Search box, clicked Enter, and had this page come up instead. This is damned annoying!! 203.118.172.172 13:26, 17 June 2013 (UTC)