User talk:Sahab: Difference between revisions

User talk:Sahab (view source)

Revision as of 14:57, 5 April 2014

509 bytes added , 5 April 2014

m

→‎Featured Articles

Sahab

Bureaucrats, Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Suppressors, Administrators

48,466

edits

Revision as of 14:40, 5 April 2014 (view source) Sahab (talk \| contribs) m (→‎Featured Articles) ← Older edit		Revision as of 14:57, 5 April 2014 (view source) Sahab (talk \| contribs) m (→‎Featured Articles) Newer edit →
Line 326:		Line 326:

	:I don't know. The "Pictorial Islam" template also links to library content, and to other things which are high quality, but I don't think would be right in a "Featured Articles" list (e.g. [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]). I'm not saying I'm against the idea, only that we can't really use that template to decide what should be "featured". I think we discussed this a while ago and commented on how hard it would be to choose what articles would go there. I still feel the same. I could easily point out articles that are crap (luckily they are only a few), but picking articles that I think are good would result in me picking practically everything we have. [[User:Sahab\|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab\|talk]]) 07:40, 5 April 2014 (PDT)		:I don't know. The "Pictorial Islam" template also links to library content, and to other things which are high quality, but I don't think would be right in a "Featured Articles" list (e.g. [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]). I'm not saying I'm against the idea, only that we can't really use that template to decide what should be "featured". I think we discussed this a while ago and commented on how hard it would be to choose what articles would go there. I still feel the same. I could easily point out articles that are crap (luckily they are only a few), but picking articles that I think are good would result in me picking practically everything we have. [[User:Sahab\|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab\|talk]]) 07:40, 5 April 2014 (PDT)
			::The thing with RationalWiki and other similar wikis, I would assume, is that they're a lot more lenient towards what they allow on there (just imagine some of the material here that have been deleted or moved out of the mainspace). So they have a lot more scope when putting together such a page. With us, most of the content, especially the new stuff, can be regarded as "featured content" simply because it's hosted on the site. [[User:Sahab\|--Sahab]] ([[User talk:Sahab\|talk]]) 07:57, 5 April 2014 (PDT)