Talk:Binary digits: Difference between revisions

Line 61:

Would it help for us to have a more structured process for getting tasks from draft to non-draft status? I can see, laterly, that part of the problem with the existing routine is lack of reasonably rapid attention and/or interest when new draft tasks are added. If there's interest, we can implement something. Right now, I've got a consensus-based approach with a minimum-required level of feedback in mind. (i.e. each task would need at least two or three people's input, if only a "looks good to me," and would need to incubate a minimum amount of time) --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 10:29, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

:I don't think we need to go over the top. We want to incourage innovation and development, not stifle it. Some tasks are more interesting than others, so some tasks may not have high traffic. It is a wiki, so contributors can always add and update the tasks. There may be some developers who are only looking at the non-draft tasks, so the drafts are just not getting attention. I don't think we should make the process more difficult than what it is and we don't want to lose skilled writers because of restrictive policies. We could have a 30 day incubation period to enable tasks to evolve, but I think that is the extent of what we should be doing. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 14:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)