AVID:Requests for Comment/Add "Investigation Needed" as an Availability tier: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
|||
Line 14:
#{{Oppose}} '''as a standalone tier'''. I don’t think it needs to be an Availability tier, I think it should be stated after a standard Availability tier, e.g. "Rare, but it may need more investigation to confirm." [[File:Eternity Media Group Wordmark.png|100px|link=User:EternityMediaGroup]] ([[User Talk:EternityMediaGroup|Lets chat!]]) 23:56, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
#{{Oppose}} for similar reasons as EMG. [[User:Solarstrike|Solarstrike]] ([[User talk:Solarstrike|talk]]) 20:50, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
#{{Oppose}} Seems redundant as a standalone tier. <span style="font-family: 'Verdana';">[[User:Doctorine Dark|Doctorine Dark]] <small>([[User talk:Doctorine Dark|talk]])</small></span> 12:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
===Comments===
Line 29 ⟶ 30:
{{Support}} [[File:NLiteChannel.jpg|75px|link=User:N-Lite]] ([[User talk:N-Lite|The Third Place]]) 12:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
{{Support}} <span style="font-family: 'Verdana';">[[User:Doctorine Dark|Doctorine Dark]] <small>([[User talk:Doctorine Dark|talk]])</small></span> 12:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
===Abstain===
| |||
Revision as of 12:40, 6 February 2023
I have been testing this on the Clip-On libraries to tell that more captures are needed in order to determine where it falls in the Availability scale. 
(Talk!) 23:36, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Proposal 1: Add it as a tier
Support
Support yes, when I wrote the PopCap Games page I did not investigate enough ForcedExcess26 (talk) 23:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
*
Support 
(The Third Place) 20:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support Great idea!
(Talk to Me!) 09:57, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Abstain
#
Abstain, both sides are making good points (The Third Place) 23:47, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- the oppose side hasn't even replied yet ForcedExcess26 (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think he's just trying to hedge his bets either way. Solarstrike (talk) 20:50, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- the oppose side hasn't even replied yet ForcedExcess26 (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Oppose as a standalone tier. I don’t think it needs to be an Availability tier, I think it should be stated after a standard Availability tier, e.g. "Rare, but it may need more investigation to confirm." 
(Lets chat!) 23:56, 3 February 2023 (UTC)- Oppose for similar reasons as EMG. Solarstrike (talk) 20:50, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Seems redundant as a standalone tier. Doctorine Dark (talk) 12:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
Proposal 2: Make this a template
Support
Support After rethinking, this would be better. (Talk!) 23:04, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Support 
· Talk · Edits 23:09, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Support as I feel this idea would work far better. It communicates that we are not 100% confident with our understanding of the logo, whilst also showing what we know so far. (Lets chat!) 01:12, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Support for this incarnation. Solarstrike (talk) 02:56, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Support (The Third Place) 12:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Support Doctorine Dark (talk) 12:40, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Abstain
Abstain I think it's a better idea as a tier. 
(Talk to Me!) 09:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
