Jump to content

Talk:Stewards/elections 2009

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This is an archived version of this page, as edited by John Vandenberg (talk | contribs) at 12:56, 29 November 2008 (→‎Suffrage to vote: seems reasonable). It may differ significantly from the current version.

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Jayvdb in topic Suffrage to vote

Times

Someone mentioned on IRC that this shouldn't run at the same time as the fundraiser, due to the work required by the translators. Majorly talk 13:46, 26 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

When does the fundraiser end? WJBscribe (talk) 17:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
From what I've been told, it will end at an as-of-yet undetermined time in January (probably toward the beginning of the month). --MZMcBride 17:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
It is scheduled to run through January 15, according to this. - Rjd0060 17:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
This was also mentioned on-wiki as well. As stated there, waiting is probably quite a good idea.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
Would it be correct to say that we're looking at making this a 2009 election, then? And if so, shouldn't we change the page to reflect this? At least eliminating the part about voting starting on ?? November seems like a good idea, since it obviously won't start in November at all. Heimstern 09:48, 23 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
Changing the page name is a good idea. Majorly talk 13:13, 23 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
Maybe changing it to something that carries 08-09 in the name to convey that it's not like two whole years are being skipped, more like that it's shifting from the end of a year to the beginning of the next. ++Lar: t/c 13:55, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Suffrage to vote

I would again suggest that suffrage requirements for voting ought to be tightened, and suggest that the qualifications for voting in a board election be used. What we have now, one edit on any wiki, and a link to Meta, is way too loose and too easy to game. ++Lar: t/c 14:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, definitely. The board vote requirements seem to be reasonable for stewelections as well. --Thogo (talk) 18:49, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
I agree; we need broad community participation - it is important to ensure that the results actually reflect broader community confidence in the person's ability to do the role. The board vote requirements seem appropriate. John Vandenberg 12:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)Reply