Wikipedia talk:Join in

message: This is a good idea, for people who want to work on a certain article with help from a couple editors but know their nomination isn't likely to succeed in AID. I'm tempted to nominate Oregon State University as I've been meaning to improve that for a while. VegaDark 01:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do! - Samsara contrib talk 02:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: I'd like to make another proposal (competition drives business), a draft of which is here. - Samsara contrib talk 02:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Competing proposal 

message: Since nobody reads large paragraph blocks, I'll be succinct. 1: You make a good point. A collaboration based around a 'crtical mass' of editors is a brillaint idea. 2: Revise the rules just a tad. Follow your own suggestion, and allow the nominator to specify the number of people required. Once that number has ammased, someone should notify them all and they can get cracking together, for a set period of time. Your idea:
===ARTICLE===
====(1 volunteer)====
:nominated DATE: Expires Date four weeks from now
::requires 3 votes by Date one week from now to remain
; Join in now!
# (sign with four tildes) 
; Comments:
* (put your reason for nomination, sign again)
----
My modifications:
==[Category]==
===ARTICLE===
:nominated DATE: Expires Date four weeks from now
::Editor requires [#] of people to begin work.
; Join in now!
# (sign with four tildes) 
; Comments:
* (put your reason for nomination, sign again)
----
-Litefantastic 00:12, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, once again, exactly what I was thinking. - Samsara contrib talk 02:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't follow what the "category" section is supposed to have. VegaDark 03:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, thanks for pointing that out, I was just pasting blindly. See what we have now. Don't worry about making a mistake - we'll fix it promptly if necessary. - Samsara contrib talk 03:49, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Litefantastic's suggestion 

message: I've tentatively suggested displaying active collaborations for a short time in a separate section (for three days, but do disagree!). Let me know whether you think this is too formal, distracting, whatever! - Samsara contrib talk 10:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean the ones which have gotten the required number of contributors, and are regularly being worked on? If so, I think there should be a page of those, but the collaboration stays for as long as it is active. That way, new-comers can add themselves to the list and begin work. The original contributors should remove it when they feel the work has cooled down, and there is much less contributions (like it is now with frog). If there is a problem with the number of collaborations, then maybe they should be categorised so people can browse in their field of preference. --liquidGhoul 11:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this is a good idea. I just came accross this page, and I was left wondering which articles were still up for nomination and which ones were active collaborations. I think there should be a section called "active collaborations" that lists all collaborations. Perhaps leave them on the list for a month, whatever makes the page manageable. jacoplane 02:04, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Displaying active collaborations 

message: You should probably try and spread the word about this collaboration if you want it to be successful. I'll post something on my userpage and try to tell some people about it. Maybe post something on the community bulletin board? Gflores Talk 06:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, the only reason I found it was looking through the AID cantidates, I bet most people don't know about this yet. VegaDark 06:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I've listed it there. Also well done to Litefantastic for making a template. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 14:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: comment

message: Over to you now, whoever you may be, friend or stranger! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 02:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's hope that I'm redundant