CZ:Proposals/Approval and Feedback: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
|Target date for next step = Feb 20 | |Target date for next step = Feb 20 | ||
|Notes = | |Notes = | ||
}} | |||
== Involving authors in approvals== | |||
{{proposal | |||
|Brief descriptive title = Involving authors in approvals | |||
|Summary of proposal = 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. | |||
|Name and date of original proposer = [[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 07:57, 14 February 2008 (CST) | |||
|Username of driver = [[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 04:01, 15 February 2008 (CST) | |||
|Next step = Get feedback | |||
|Target date for next step = 20 February | |||
|Notes = | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{Proposals navigation}} | {{Proposals navigation}} | ||
Revision as of 13:03, 15 February 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. To make the feedback system easier to use for both readers and Citizens, feedback can be in the form of a machine-readable proposed edit.
| ||||
| 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):
|