Talk:Vote unitarity: Difference between revisions

Line 17:

: [[User:Psephomancy]]: a couple of questions for you: 1. do you more-or-less agree with that taxonomy? If so, we should probably refine the idea over at [[Electowiki:Policy]]. 2. Assuming you agree with the taxonomy, you agree that [[Vote Unitarity]] seems to be in the "Not-quite-Wikipedia" category?

: [[User:Dr. Edmonds]], I'm leaning toward removing the banner from this article. But please help us get the full corpus of unbannered content in the main Electowiki namespace up to "Not-quite-Wikipedia" standards by helping us make sure that ''at least'' the stuff you're contributing is on track to becoming Wikipedia content in five years (-ish) by convincing Psephomancy and I by helping us get [[Vote Unitarity]] up to the "Not-quite-Wikipedia" standard that I'm laying out here. Does that sound reasonable? -- [[User:RobLa|RobLa]] ([[User talk:RobLa|talk]]) 19:36, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

:::: I have added a reply to [[Electowiki_talk:Policy#EPOV_discussion_about_Vote_Unitarity_article|the section labled "EPOV discussion about Vote Unitarity article"]] with details of "vetting". I would think there is a difference between '''Advocacy''' and '''Not-quite-Wikipedia'''. I was neutral in my writing of Vote Unitarity it is just really new. [[PLACE FAQ]] is a good example of '''Advocacy''' and reads like "Why you should choose Method Z instead of Method Q". There is a section in Vote Unitarity about its creation and motivations. If more detail is wanted then I can add more --[[User:Dr. Edmonds|Dr. Edmonds]] ([[User talk:Dr. Edmonds|talk]]) 19:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)