On 19/08/2012 03:13, Steven Zhang wrote:
On 17/08/2012, at 11:06 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
On 17/08/2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000
pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008
- it wa
On 17/08/2012, at 11:06 PM, Katie Chan wrote:
> On 17/08/2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
>> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000
>> pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since
>> 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD -
On 17/08/2012, at 10:55 PM, Charles Matthews
wrote:
>
> You are saying that there is a backlog (a problem of success), so the
> thing is broken? I know attention-seeking rhetoric is normal in our
> discussions, but what exactly is your logic? You preferred the older
> system. I don't know what
On 17/08/2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000
pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008
- it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day
were on one page, a
On 17 August 2012 12:36, Steven Zhang wrote:
> So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000
> pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since
> 2008 - it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a
> particular day were on
On 8/17/2012 7:36 AM, Steven Zhang wrote:
So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000
pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008
- it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day
were on one page,
So, I had a look at articles for creation today, and there was nearly 1,000
pending article submissions. Articles for creation has changed a lot since 2008
- it was of a similar structure to XFD - all submissions for a particular day
were on one page, and people could come along and approve or r
