Jump to content

Resolution talk:Main

From Wikimedia Foundation Governance Wiki


Would anyone mind if I started a little cleanup with regard to the page names of the resolutions? Some pages are named "Resolution:Xx", some are named "Resolution:xx", some "Resolution Xx" and some "Resolution xx". It's not very tidy. I wish to move the resolutions to "Resolution:Xx" and categorize them. Is that ok? Jon Harald Søby 10:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Sounds nice. I have been thought the similar, and wonder if it is okay to add a serial number to those resolutions (like UN General meeting resolutions). How do you think? --Aphaea 11:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply
A serial number could be a good idea too; but should there be some kind of system to them? Or just start at 1? Jon Harald Søby 21:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)Reply
Could we organize this with subpages as well? --Daniel Mayer 17:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm formatting everything according to Resolution:Xx/Yy. I'm afraid to fix non-Latin alphabet language redirects, because I don't have all the necessary script plugins. Dates and formatting on this page have been standardized as well. Question: So far I've made only very minor changes to resolution titles (capitalization and occasionally punctuation), but would more freedom be permitted to standardize equivalent things, like "Resolution:Hardware Jun-06" and "Resolution:Hardware Purchase Feb-06"? --Spangineer 02:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)Reply


Resolutions should be translated into the core Wikimedia languages. The partial translations linked from the top of the page are significantly out of date. a user that read the old pages thanks to a default language-redirection based on their browser preference... or no English proficiency... could get a significantly wrong impression. A mechanism for deprecating a translation that hasn't been updated (for the purpose of auto-redirection) would be handy here. Sj 00:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC) Sj 00:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Have you read the actual pages you are talking about? See the notices on top of Résolutions and 决议. Also, we try not to use talk pages on this wiki and instead focus on m:Wikimedia site feedback so more people can participate. Cbrown1023 talk 15:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
The headers on those pages are clear, but the pages still give a strange impression. A good translation would inclue automatic redirection based on language preference; good deprecation would prevent that sort of redirection. Should those headers be put on other pages such as Nos projets as well?
As for the talk page use -- I copied this initial thread there. I'm leaving it here for the benefit of people editing this page; the catch-all is archived frequently, and doesn't group comments about a single page together. Sj 09:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC) (and 07:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC))Reply

Separating formalities from significant resolutions

Related to the question of translating and better-disseminating resolutions and the work of the Board: It would be useful to see this page split into "formalities" and "other resolutions". There are too many formalities here, and they clutter up the page making it hard to use for meaningful browsing of Board resolutions.

'Formality' resolutions (approving minutes, reappointing members in good standing, approving chapters [there may be resolutions related the the process, or recommendations made to specific chapters; but the approval resolutions themselves are not exciting]) should be visible, but the boilerplate content isn't interesting. It's important that they be transmitted/translated in title, but not in content.

Other resolutions (new Projects-wide policies, creation of committees, delegation of authorities and assignment of responsibility) should be translated. Their substance may be required knowledge for projects and project- or meta-contributors in all languages.

As for the layout, perhaps these could be two serial time-ordered lists, or a two-column table. As part of reducing clutter, I combined three sets of resolutions that were all decided/voted on at once (and could just as well have been a single resolution with multiple clauses -- reappointment of members and assignment of board roles). Sj 07:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply