User talk:The Utahraptor/The do's and don't's of RfA voting

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Success evaluation

"This process was initially a success, as there were more promotions in the period between 2004 and 2007 (1388) than the period between 2008 and 2011[2] (443)." It is unclear why you are using this statistic to determine success. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 23:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Better? The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 23:37, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's better, since it does not make the claim as explicitly that more promotions is better. Some might find the "but" jarring anyway, though, since I think some people probably feel it is more effective now than it was in 04/05. I think there are too many apostrophes in the title, also :) ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 00:48, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In case you missed it...

Please see my comment on the RfA talk page. [1]

I like this essay. It's a step in the right direction. Master&Expert (Talk) 12:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:The_Utahraptor/The_do%27s_and_don%27t%27s_of_RfA_voting"