imported>Rainer Typke |
imported>D. Matt Innis |
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{ToApprove|editor=Robert Tito|group=Computers|url=http://locke.citizendium.org:8080/wiki?title=Tux/Gallery&oldid=100084922|date=april 26 2007}}
| | #Redirect [[Talk:Tux/Draft]] |
| | |
| according to me this should be approved alongside [[Tux]] but open to new pictures in the draft section. [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | <span style="background:black"> <font color="red"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font> </span> 18:03, 22 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| :Fine by me. [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 19:39, 22 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| :I agree. In my opinion, we should go ahead and approve the gallery for Tux. [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 20:41, 22 April 2007 (CDT) | |
| | |
| <randomness>April 26th.. that's my birthday! :-P</randomness> --[[User:Joshua David Williams|Joshua David Williams]] 08:52, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| I agree that this can be approved. --[[User:Rainer Typke|Rainer Typke]] 14:15, 30 April 2007 (MEZ)
| |
| | |
| | |
| ==Approving galleries==
| |
| Josuha, Happy birthday.
| |
| | |
| Rob, if we are approving this gallery then we also need to approve the biology gallery, see [[Biology/Gallery]]. Although, we may want to improve the figure legends before we seek approval. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris Day|(talk)]] 22:13, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| I think for clarity we either include ***/gallery in the approval of the *** article or not. So far that is obscure - so I opt to play by the book - approve per article unless the editor council decides differently. I will bring it up there however since to me - frankly - it makes no sense to seperately approve an article and na accompanying gallery seperately. By the way have you been looking into the approve template to allow more editors? [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | <span style="background:grey"> <font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font> </span> 22:46, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| :Makes sense to me to keep the approval as one process for related sub-categories.
| |
| :I had not looked into adding more editors. What options would you like? Up to three editors with parameters editor1, editor2 and editor3? [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris Day|(talk)]] 23:46, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| :::4 max, the 4th makes the approval final - the article then should be approved only the final draft moves will have to take place, the 4th editor should initiate that - or can that be done per template as well? (i.e. mail to constables@ ???) thanks so far Chris, [[User:Robert Tito|Robert Tito]] | <span style="background:grey"> <font color="yellow"><b>[[User talk:Robert Tito|Talk]]</b></font> </span> 00:00, 27 April 2007 (CDT)
| |
| ::::So we need four now for a final approval? I must have missed that. I'm also a little confused at the request for the email and the 4th editor. Are you talking about the ToApprove template in this case? Is there a discussion on another page? Then I'll have a better idea. So far everything you have discussed is possible. I just need to understnad the details. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] [[User talk:Chris Day|(talk)]] 00:16, 27 April 2007 (CDT)
| |