Board Thread:Community Announcements and Events/@comment-4544033-20160207013932/@comment-25356303-20160208194920

Wulfharth wrote: There might have been ways to improve the FA system instead of changing it. For example, if it was taking too long, then maybe shorten the deadline (if one exists).

I'm not sure what you mean by poor results overall. Do you mean the last few FAs were not worthy of FA or that no one is nominating articles?

If most of the community has no clear idea of what being CA/GA/FA entails, then that's a problem with the maturity of the wiki and its users. I actually believe this is a legit concern based on how I have seen voting in the past, so you have a valid point. It's tough.

Personally, I think the the recent FA's have been good quality, so something is working. The last thing this wiki wants is another CT drama fiasco like "Concensus against to be removed from The Circle." The problem is that shortening the deadline would just mean fewer votes. The community generally takes a very long time to vote on these no matter how much we mention it, so if we shorten the deadline that would not help anything.

By poor results I mean many articles were having successful CA/GA nominations (FA to an extent, but not as much) despite obviously lacking in the requirements. There were a lot of nominations, but people didn't read the rules well enough.

Since we only have one FA a month it's easier to pick the best of the best, whereas we have several CA and GA per month, which is where the problems were mostly forming.