* Tobias Oelgarte wrote: >> The poll asked whether there should be formalized restrictions beyond >> the existing ones (only good articles can be proposed). Voters decided >> against that and to keep the status quo instead where it is decided on >> a case-by-case basis which articles to feature on the main page without >> additional formalized selection criteria that would disqualify certain >> articles. Put differently, they decided that if someone disagress that >> a certain article should not be featured, they cannot point to policy >> to support their argument. >> >That isn't true. Since the policy states that all terms are treated >equal (NPOV) there is only a discussion if the date might be suitable >(topics with correlation to a certain date get precedence). Otherwise it >is decided if the quality (actuality and so on) is suitable for AotD, >since there might be a lot of time between the last nomination for good >articles and the versions might differ strongly due to recent changes. >If a topic is offensive or not does not play any role. Only quality >matters. This rule existed from the beginning and it did not change.
What I meant to say is: "if someone disagrees with featuring a certain article, they cannot point to policy that restricts which subjects can be featured to support their argument" as there is none and editors de- cided against introducing any. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
