Anonymous user
Forum:Allowing featured articles to be re-featured: Difference between revisions
Forum:Allowing featured articles to be re-featured (edit)
Revision as of 19:33, 23 June 2019
, 4 years agono edit summary
imported>LostInRiverview (←Created page with "{{Forumheader|Community discussions}} I think we could alleviate the frequent issue of not having current featured articles t...") |
imported>DrakonoSkerdikas No edit summary |
||
Line 9:
Are there any thoughts regarding this proposal? -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<span style="color:navy;">LostInRiverview</span>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">talk</font>]] · [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">blog</font>]] · [[Special:Contributions/LostInRiverview|<font color="green">contribs</font>]]</sup>''' 03:46, June 22, 2019 (UTC)
==I disagree==
That may kill the initiative of quality-control: articles of significant subject would remain indefinitely looking crap that are messy and require serious copy-editing (not just grammar, but organization and alike), as for articles that allowed to be re-featured would be prone to being unfairly... well re-featured as many times people see it fit. Re-featuring doesn't seem like a good idea, because it doesn't give much motivation to fix/clean other articles that been left messy for far too long. [[User:DrakonoSkerdikas|DrakonoSkerdikas]] ([[User talk:DrakonoSkerdikas|talk]]) 19:33, June 23, 2019 (UTC)
| |||