User:Chzz/test
This is re. WP:PCRFC, and I might post it to the talk page of that RfC
---
I know that many of you are concerned this RfC is tl;dr and I think many people mistake length for drama.
I actually don't mind the length of it, and I'm glad we've had such a (almost entirely) friendly, collegiate discussion about such a controversial topic.
I'm looking forwards, thinking of how we can make progress on the issues; I'm not advocating any rash decision at all - hence writing down my brief thoughts here, for now.
I'll be poking the most vocal people from the RfC, to get their comments.
With the major caveat that this is a vague, first-draft, document-for-discussion...it is not a proposal, it isn't even a proposal for a proposal yet. And, please read all of this with as open a mind as possible. With that said; my thoughts;
- Remove PC from all articles, within 2 weeks. (or 3, 4, whatever...this is vague, mkay - take all of the specifics as 'placeholder for discussion) Firstly, post to AN and ask; maybe some days later, notify all admins who've applied it. Or, the other way around? Set a final date, at which time anything still PC gets changed to semi.
- Change the various policy/guideline/edit-notices/WP:RPP to state that PC is only to be used for testing, and not on any live articles
- Agree on a selected group of people, assigned with specific tasks. Select them through the usual - discuss, consensus. Let anyone who wants put themselves forward. Let's see if anyone really objects; get a good cross-section - and that absolutely means trying some people from the vehement anti-PC and the dedicated pro-PC. "Open to anyone" (who can commit to it) but, it'd be nice to keep it small and manageable. Maybe "12 men, good and true"? (By which, all I mean is, 12 is a reasonable number)
- Assign specific goals to that group. For purpose of discussion, let's call it Comittee for asessing Pending Changes - COPS
- Analyse this RfC, and summarize the content
- Look at previous comments regarding PC (from the trial, polls) and take those into account
- WITHIN A FIXED TIME (1 month? 2?) Based on findings, present the community with an ultra-clear, specific proposal or, if necessary, proposals. Whilst not wishing to pre-judge, mostly here I am expecting some kind of specific proposal for a new trial, on "maximum of x,000 articles" - and with as clear-as-possible, specific measures of success/failure. And most most importantly, a deadline and ultra-crystal-clear statement about exactly what happens at the end of it, ie ending of a further trial. The trial will have specific objectives, set out from the start.
- The committee would then report back, on the results of the survey. They'd be allowed some time (month?) to assess the impact of whatever-trial, and present findings to the community. And then, we rinse and repeat.
??? profit