CZ:Proposals/Approval and Feedback: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Gareth Leng |
imported>Warren Schudy |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
|Name and date of original proposer = [[User:Warren Schudy|Warren Schudy]] 13:34, 9 February 2008 (CST) | |Name and date of original proposer = [[User:Warren Schudy|Warren Schudy]] 13:34, 9 February 2008 (CST) | ||
|Username of driver = [[User:Warren Schudy|Warren Schudy]] | |Username of driver = [[User:Warren Schudy|Warren Schudy]] | ||
|Next step = | |Next step = Get permission from approval and feedback committee to find someone to implement the specification. | ||
|Target date for next step = March | |Target date for next step = March 11 | ||
|Notes = | |Notes = | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 11:06, 6 March 2008
These are proposals that will go (or are now) before the Approval and Feedback group.
Enable external feedback
Summary: Each article should have a link for non-citizens to submit feedback. Feedback can be read and acted upon by any Citizen. Feedback can be read both in an additional tab for each cluster, as well as in a global queue similar to "recent changes".
| ||||
| Complete proposal | ||||
Involving authors in approvals
| Summary: There are two aspects: 1) I see no reason why anyone should not feel able to nominate an article for approval (even their own article). Indeed I see every reason why all contributors to Citizendium should feel encouraged to read articles with potential approval in mind.
2) To approve articles requires the support of relevant editors. But I see no reason why authors should not also be able (and indeed be encouraged) to express their support or otherwise for approval, and indeed as Citizendium values fluency and style then the opinions of non-expert readers are very important too.
| ||||||
| Complete proposal | ||||||
| Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only) | |
|
Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):
|