You are a super! Who wrote instructions for proposed projects? Me? So or rewrite instructions or return news to Goings-on :) --Baya 18:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- I'm really not sure what you are trying to say. Having a project proposal is fine, but linking it in the news template is over the top in my opinion. You can discuss it on the template's talk page and if enough people support it, it can go back. - Taxman 18:19, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- I made only things that proposed here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects#Instructions . So I ask: How people/me must understand these instructions and your action (removing proposed from goings-on) --Baya 12:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- That does seem to fit with those instructions, but common sense says that that proposal doesn't fit in with the Goings on type news. Like I said others might disagree with me, but I think having it on the new projects proposals page is enough. Maybe it's just because I can't see for the life of me how a geneology database would fit in with the Wikimedia Foundation's mission. - Taxman 16:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
New Project Proposals on the Main Meta News Page
I happen to agree here with Baya on this point. The Meta news on the front page of Meta has been a traditional place to put an announcement for a new project proposal, which this user clearly has done. I would revert your decision, but I think we need to come to an understanding about this first. Indeed one of my major complaints about the current group of Wikistandards promoters is that they didn't use the front page of Meta to advertise that they were holding a major Wikimedia-wide vote on trying to get the project approved.
Proposals for new projects page clearly states that it is Meta policy to encourage new project proposals to be added onto the Goings-on page and this has been done for many other projects. Just not recently. I don't know how this is over the top, but I guess you have a different opinion on this. Where to put projects that decide to do a demo outside of the Wikimedia Foundation server farm is certainly something else that can be debated, but in this case a new project proposal was clearly started, and indeed it is as good as any other semi-recent new project proposal.
That Baya is not a native English speaker meant that perhaps what he wrote needed to be cleaned up for grammar, but the link did not have to be removed. See also Goings-on for August and September 2005 for some clear examples of how this was done in the past. --Roberth 17:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- That's fine. I'm certainly ok with being shown a better way. If you think it's reasonable go ahead and put back a cleaned up version, hopefully no harm done for it being out while discussed. I still don't see how it fits in with what the foundation is trying to do, but that can easily come out in the proposal. - Taxman 22:50, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
RfD - How to deal..
I've answered for your post on the talk page. If it weren't enough feel free to ask for some other necessary details. :)
And no, I don't have here any power (nor special powers ;> ) neither. "Me be just a mere sysop on a language project", not a superhero, unfortunaltely. :>
Hello! I am writing you because of your involvement at Talk:Errors in the Wikipedia logo. This is a message to inform all the Wikipedias that there is an ongoing project to fix the errors in the Wikipedia logo. There's also a plan to add more characters in the blank spaces and find characters for the other sides of the globe. Feel to visit Wikipedia/Logo on Meta-Wiki and discuss it on the talk page. Thank you, and see you there! Cary Bass demandez 19:11, 9 October 2008 (UTC)